S B 

195 

•Got 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 

'"c^y^ 



sh(3if.i.G:.a.n 



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 




SILOS. SILRGE 



^ 



AND 






callie-Feedin 



M 




c 



SILOS, SILAGE, 



AND 



CATTLE FEEDING. 



A Pracbical Treatise or) Growir)^ ai)d HarYeshii)^ Sila6e 
Crops, Buildii)6 Silos ai)d Feedip^ Cabbie- 



F. A. GULLEY, M. Sc 

Hutl^or of "First Lessors in Agriculture;" Director 

of tl|e Texas Hgricultural Experirqerit 

Station, 






"^- ILLUSTRATED. 




PRICK, 50 CKNTS. 



DALLAS, TEXAS: 

TEXAS FARM AND RANCH PUBLISHING CO. 
1890. 



Evirred accordhig to Act of Congress in the year 1890, by Texas Farm 
AND Ranch Publishing Co., in the office of the Librarian 
of Congress at Washi^igton, D. C 



<^%^\ 



^ 



FROM THE PRESS OF 
JOHN F. WORLEY. STATIONER AND PRrNTER, 
DALLAS, TEXAS, 



CONTENTS 



PAGE 

Chapter I — Ensilage of Forage Crops 5 

Chapter II — Silage vs. Dry Forage 9 

Chapter III — Silage Crops and How to Grow Them . . 14 

Chapter IV — Varieties of Corn and Sorghum 21 

Chapter V — Harvesting the Crop 26 

Chapter VI— The Silo 34 

Chapter VII— Silage as a Feed Stuff 45 

Chapter VIII— Cattle Feeding 49 

Chapter IX— Cattle Feeding Shed 59 



ILLUSTRATIONS. 

PAGE. 

Bedding Tand — Single and Double Beds 17 

Corn Knife 29 

Cotton Seed Boiler 57-58 

Doors for Silo 37 

Framework of Silo 37 

Plan of Cheap Silo 41 

Plan of Double Silo 36 

Plan of Corner of Silo 42 

Plan of Cattle- Feeding Shed 55-6-7 

Rack for Hauling Forage 3o> 3V 

Root Development of Corn 20 

Smoothing Harrow 20 



pKfif^Gfi, 



'^fk 



'HpHE following pages have been written partly at the solicitation 
of the Texas Farm and Ranch Publishing Company, and partly 
to answer more fully the many requests received for information in 
regard to Silos and the Ensilage of forage plants. 

The greater part of the literature on the subject is based on the 
use of Silage in the Northern States. 

Believing, as I do, that the climate and soil of the Southern half 
of the country is better adapted to the growth and ensilage of forage 
crops than the more Northern States, and that cattle food may here 
be produced at less cost, this book has been written with a desire to 
encourage a careful study of the most economical method of convert- 
ing the products of our fertile soil into beef and milk. 

F. A. GULLEY. 

College Station, Texas, Feb., 1890. 



SILOS, ENSILAGE AND CATTLE FEEDING. 



CHAPTER I. 
Ensilage of Forage Crops. 

I^TORING forage crops in silos has been practiced in Europe 
l@ for some years, but it is comparatively new in this country, 
dating back not more than fifteen years. 

"The many favorable reports in regard to the ensilage of 
maize by the farmers of France led me, in 1875, to make experi- 
ments in the ensilage of corn fodder, in two silos, 12 feet long 
and 6 feet wide, and with two similar silos of broom corn seed, 
with the most satisfactory results. 

"Mr. Francis Morris, of Maryland, made a silo in 1876, and 
the results of his experience were published in 1877. A number 
of silos were built in the United States within the next three or 
four years, nearly all of which were widely advertised in the agri- 
cultural press. After this time the practice was rapidly extended, 
and silos are now found in almost every State and Territor3^ 

"In July, 1882, the Department of Agriculture at Washing- 
ton published a report on ensilage, which contained statements of 
the experience of 91 persons, distributed as follows: Maine, 4; 
New Hampshire, 2 ; Vermont, 1 1 ; Massachusetts, 28 ; Rhode 
Island, i; Connecticut, 5; New York, 21; New Jersey, 5; Mary- 
land, 2; Virginia, 2; Kentucky, i; Tennessee, i; North Carolina, 
i; Wisconsin, 3; Iowa, i; Nebraska, i; Canada, 2. But even at 
that time there were undoubtedly many silos in the country that 
were not included in this enumeration. The capacity of the silos 
reported varies from about 8 to 500 tons each."* 

A small silo filled with silage was exhibited at the Atlanta 
Exposition in 1881 After this, a silo built by the author at the 
Mississippi Agricultural College in 1882 was the first one fairly 
tested in the Gulf States, so far as we can learn. 



*Silos, Ensilage and Silage, 1SS9, M. Miles, M. D., F. R., M. S., pp. 37-S. 



Ensilage of Forage Crops. 



As some confusion exists as to the proper name of the con- 
tents of the silo and the meaning of the word "ensilage," we wish 
to state that we have adopted the following definition, from Dr. 
Miles : 

"For the convenience of those not familiar with these terms, 
the following definitions may be given, as representing the pres- 
ent nomenclature of the subject: 

''Silo — A closed pit, or reservoir, in which either dry grain 
or green fodder is preserved. 

''Silage — The green fodder preserved in a silo. 

"Ensilage — The process of preserving green fodder in silos."* 

It is well known that when green and fresh plants of any 
kind are piled in a heap, in moderately warm weather, the heap 
heats and soon begins to decay, and forms a rotten, disagreeable 
mass. 

Formerly it was believed the decay was the result of chem- 
ical decomposition, brought on by the action of the oxygen of 
the atmosphere, which might be prevented by exclusion of the 
air, as in sealing up fruit in air-tight cans; but it is now held 
that the fermentation is caused and the decomposition hastened 
by the growth of minute organisms floating in the atmosphere; 
which find in the moist mass of succulent matter the food for 
rapid increase and growth. 

A low temperature renders the organisms inactive, and a 
high temperature destroys them, as in scalding fruit before it is 
canned. 

The investigations of Pasteur and other experimenters show 
that if the air is filtered before it is allowed to come iu contact 
with a substance that, under ordinary conditions, sets up putre- 
factive decomposition, the substance will remain in the same 
condition until air not filtered reaches it. 

All who have had much experience in the ensilage of green 
crops know that sometimes the silage does not keep well; it comes 
out quite sour, and still again, a portion of it will be quite rotten 
and unfit for food, even with careful management. 

What causes the changes that take place in ensilaged green 
forage — how much of it is due to bacterial and how much to 
chemical action is not yet fully understood 



*Silos, Silage and Ensilage, M . Miles, p. 8. 



Ensilage of Forage Crops. 7 

In the early practice of ensilage of forage in this country the 
French system of rapid filling of the silo and use of heavy weights 
to compress the silage, recommended by Goffart, was followed, 
and the result was silage with a sour taste. 

We believe Dr. Miles was the first to recommend filling the 
silo slowly and without tramping, so as to allow the forage put 
in each day time to get quite warm, and thus destroy the bac- 
teria that causes the acid fermentation. 

Slow filling, or filling in two or three feet every other day, 
to allow each layer to heat, has been quite largely adopted, and 
we now have many reports of "sweet" silage in place of sour 
silage. The improvement, however, seems not to be due to slow 
filling entirely, as many persons fill their silos i-apidly and make 
as sweet silage as is secured by slow filling 

It has been noticed that the condition of the crop when ensi- 
laged has a good deal to do with the acidity of the silage. Corn 
cut quite green, i. e., at the tasseling stage or earlier, is apt to 
make sour silage, while corn allowed to become nearly ripe, and 
not put up in a too succulent condition, is found to make sweet 
silage, with either slow or rapid filling. 

In our own experience we have gotten best results by allow- 
ing the corn to grow until the kernels are hard, then cutting and 
throwing in arrafuls on the ground and letting it lie from twelve 
to twenty-four hours to wilt, when the stalks and leaves were 
green at this stage of growth, before filling into the silo. If the 
forage is not green we cut and fill at once. 

Handled in this way, we have made "sweet" silage, filling 
in two feet every second and every third day, and we have se- 
cured equally good results by filling an 8o-ton silo in four days. 

It is often stated that the crop will not keep well if put in 
while wet with dew or with rain. In 1S84, as an experiment, we 
filled a 50-ton silo, during a rainy spell, with corn that was drip- 
ping wet. A considerable quantity of liquid ran out from the 
bottom of the silo, and when opened the silage was quite sour, 
but otherwise seemed to have kept as well as the corn put up 
dry. The cattle ate the sour silage with as much relish, and 
seemed to thrive nearly as well as on forage put up in dry 
weather. We would not, however, recommend ensilaging wet 
forage when it can be avoided. 

We have several times put in several tons of over-ripe, or 
nearly cured, corn, and sorghum, sometimes in the middle, and 



8 Ensilage of Forage Crops. 

again near the bottom or top of the silo, and in nearly everj^ case 
had it come out more or less injured by '"dry rot" and mouldy. 

We have had corn, sorghum, both sweet and non-saccharine, 
red clover, and cow peas keep well, and again, all but the corn 
and sweet sorghum fail to keep, under as near similar conditions 
as we could provide. We have also had sorghum, and sugar cane 
bagasse left in a pile by the mill, exposed to the winter rains and 
tramped by stock, keep for months so that the cattle would eat it 
with relish, all but the upper part, while the same bagasse, taken 
fresh from the mill and packed into the silo, spoiled entirely with 
the "dry rot." 

The non-saccharine sorghums have not kept as well in our 
experience as the sweet varieties, nor as well as corn. 

It is evident that there is much yet to be learned in reference 
to the ensilage of forage crops to preserve them in the best con" 
dition for food, and to make different crops keep equally well. 

Some silage, at the top of the pit, in the corners and some- 
times near the walls, will spoil, but rhis loss may now be reduced 
to small proportions with careful management. We have practi- 
cally eliminated the loss in the corners of the silo by the plan of 
building shown in Fig. 9. With well matured corn, the loss next 
to the walls is not serious in wooden silos, although with stone 
and cement walls considerable loss is reported in the colder por- 
tions of the country. 

With us, the wooden silo, with walls lathed and plastered 
with cement mortar, gives the same result as plank walls. Rot- 
ting next to the walls may be prevented by allowing the cut for- 
age to pile up in the centre of the silo when filling, and get warm 
over night or for one day, and then pitch the heated mass over 
against the walls, repeating this process day after daj'^, thus get- 
ting warm silage piled against the Avails and in the corners. 

With the corners of the silo cut off, as shown in the plan. 
Fig. 9, and the mass well tramped next to the walls, but not in 
the centre of the pits, we have had very little trouble with silage 
rotting. 

With others, we have used both heavy and light weights on 
the top of the silage, and tarred paper and plank covers, and 
finally settled on running a lot of old hay, straw or other refuse 
material through the cutter and elevating with the carrier to 
spread over the silage a foot and a half or two feet deep after the 
silage has settled, and the last plan we like best. 



Silage vs. Dry Forage. 



The covering should not be disturbed after it is put on, un- 
less it is to place still more of the same kind on top, or fill up to 
the roof with hay or straw, or something that will press the cov- 
ering material down more compact. 

We find the space above the silage a good place to store bed- 
ding material. 

Hay placed on the silage will become musty unless plank 
and tarred paper are laid between them. We have also used saw- 
dust, and earth with good results. The latter becomes quite dry 
and may be used as a liquid absorbent under the stock during the 
winter. 

Reports are conflicting in regard to corn and sorghum put 
into the silo with and without passing them through the feed 
cutter, some claiming that the uncut fodder keeps best. In our 
own experience we have found that whole corn and sorghum 
must be put in very carefully, laid straight and well tramped 
down to keep well, and at the best it has not kept so well as 
when run through the cutter. Carelessly thrown in, a large por- 
tion spoils, and sorghum has not done so well as corn put up this 
way. 

The heavy labor in filling the silo and the trouble in getting 
whole stalks out to feed makes it so much more desirable to run 
the crop through a cutter and elevate into the silo with a carrier 
on the cutter, that we would not, in our own work, use the silo 
without the cutter. 



CHAP.TER II. 
Silage vs. Dry Forage. 

^^OME of the first who practiced ensilage of forage crops in this 
a^ country, carried away with the novelty of this new departure 
in agriculture, made very extravagant claims in regard to the 
value of silage in stock feeding. 

The shrewd manufacturers of feed cutters, and horse powers 
took advantage of and helped on the "boom" by sending out 
sheets and pamphlets advertising their machinery, containing 
statements from the most enthusiastic advocates of the system of 
ensilage. 

Remarkable yields of crops per acre and astonishing results 



lo Silage vs. Dry Forage. 

of feeding silage were reported. The assertion was made that the 
silo added to the nutriment in the forage, made it more digestible 
and therefore of much more value than it would be cured dry, as 
hay The attention of the chemist was called to the subject, but 
the analysis of silage showed no ground on which to base the 
assertions; in fact, it demonstrated that there was an actual lOvSS, 
as a portion of the forage stored in the silo is consumed in the 
process of fermentation. 

The farmers and dairynnen who had tested silage in feeding 
cattle and found it a valuable addition to their feedstuffs, were 
led to discredit the opinions of the chemists, believing them to be 
in conflict with their practical tests, and for a time many of our 
agricultural papers were filled with articles criticizing the work of 
the chemists, denouncing their determinations as theoretical con- 
clusions, of no value when compared with the results obtained by 
practical men. 

In the Fall and Winter of 1881 a carefully conducted test of 
tne comparative merits of silage and dry fodder was made at the 
New Jersey Experimental Station and reported in Bulletin No. 
19, February, 1882. One half of a crop of corn was shocked in 
the field, the other half cut up fine and placed in a silo The fod- 
der and silage were fed to cows giving milk, the corn fodder cut 
up fine. The results in yield of milk were so nearly alike that 
one may be classed as equal to the other in food value. Bulletins 
Nos. 15 and 19 of Wisconsin show nearly the same results in 
production of milk, but the churning of the milk showed that the 
butter was more perfectly separated from the milk made from 
silage. Tests at the New York Kxperiment Station also showed 
a better separation in the process of butter making from cows fed 
on silage. 

We are forced to admit that carefully conducted tests in feed- 
ing silage show that the ensilage of some of our forage crops does 
not make them of more value for feeding than the)^ would be if 
cured dry under the best conditio7is, although this may not agree 
with the opinions of Vno. practical man. 

" Experiments have been made to test the relative feeding 
value of dry fodder corn and the same fodder ensilaged, with results 
that are not decisive, as the problem is an exceedingly complex 
one, that cannot be solved by a few simple tests with a small 
number of animals."* 



*silos, Ensil.ig^e and Silage, by M. Miles, p. 93. 



Silage vs. Dry Forage. 1 1 

It should be borne in mind, however, that while the accept- 
able evidence to the present time shows that a given quantity of 
forage cured dr)^ as hay, may, under the best conditions, be of as 
much value as the same made into silage, it does not follow that 
the ensilage of certain crops may not make them of more value 
for feeding than to cure them dry, as practised on the average 
farm, or on the best managed farms. 

Crops that are difficult if not impossible to cure dry, under 
ordinary conditions, without a loss of from 25 to 50 per cent or 
more, may be stored in the silo with safety. So that as a practi- 
cal method of putting up forage, the ensilage of certain crops may 
be of ver}^ great advantage on farms where the feeding of live 
stock plays an important part. 

We do not believe it will be found profitable in this country 
to ensilage forage that ma}" be readily cured as hay — such as the 
grasses, and even red clover and cow peas if the weather is favor- 
able for drying when they are ready to harvest. 

Corn and sorghum are difficult to cure dry in any season 
without considerable loss, and especially when grown on fertile 
soil, where the stalks grow large and the crop is heavy. 

The experiments at the Wisconsin Experiment Station show 
that when corn is planted thin enough to make ears, and cured 
dry, that the larger part of the stalks will be rejected by well fed 
cattle unless the fodder is run through a cutter, and when cut up 
the butts of the stalks are not eaten. We have found that cows 
would waste a large portion of dry sorghum fodder if it was not 
cut up before feeding. We find this opinion held by all who have 
fed dry corn and sorghum forage. 

Admitting that it is necessary to pass corn and sorghum 
through the feed cutter to secure economical consumption, it is 
evident that it will require less labor to load the crop at once on 
the wagon when it is cut, haul to the cutter direct and run it into 
the silo and have it stored in safety at one operation, than to 
shock in the field, tie up, then haul to the stack or barn, and 
move again to the cutter to prepare it for feeding. 

"Hon Hiram Smith, of Wisconsin, makes the statement that 
by actual trial he found that a load of corn forage could be run 
through the feed cutter, elevated more than twenty feet, and 
deposited in the silo, in seven to eight minutes less time than was 
required to set it up in shocks in the field."* 

*Silos, Ensilage and Silage, by M. Miles, p., 95. 



12 Silage vs. Diy Forage. 

Ill this connection, we refer to a statement of Prof. E M. 
Shelton, Professor of Agriculture and Director of the Kansas Ex- 
periment Station, in which he refers to the difficulty of growing 
corn fur both grain and forage as practiced in many of the North- 
ern States: *"But here again we encounter a serious difficulty in 
the fact that we are compelled, to save the fodder in good condi- 
tion, to harvest it early in August, when, in the present arrange- 
ment of farm work, it is difficult if not impossible to get the time 
from other duties in which to do the work ; and corn cut up at 
this early season, as every farmer will recognize, unless at once 
husked and the fodder stacked or otherwise housed, becomes al- 
most entirely worthless from natural causes long belore the feed- 
ing season has arrived." 

Prof. Shelton's experience agrees with our own in Mississippi 
and in Texas, where the corn crop matures in June and must be 
kept five or six months before feeding. 

Another advantage of silage over dry fodder is that it may 
be used as an appetizer to secure the consumption of hay that 
would be rejected if fed alone. We have found that old hay, 
straw, and even weeds, may be cut up fine and mixed wdth silage 
and the cattle would eat it readily. Fed with some concentrated 
food, inferor, trashy hay may give good results if the cattle can 
be induced to eat it. Since we have used silage we have been 
troubled to find anything in the plant line poor enough to use for 
bedding. 

Cattle are fond of good silage, taking it in preference to dry 
forage, or even grain. 

In our feeding experiments in Mississippi,! steers that were 
fed all the silage and cottonseed meal they would eat, with good 
hay fed by itself, consumed less than one pound of hay per day. 
At the Texas Experiment Station last winter, not above two 
pounds of hay per head per day was eaten when the cattle were 
fed as much silage as they would consume. 

"After one of my cows had had silage for weeks, and no hay, 
I tried giving her at the usual feed time some very nice, bright, 
green hay, and silage side by side. She ignored the hay and 
commenced upon the silage as if ravenous with hunger. The hay 



*The Industrialist, April 6. 1SS9. 

+A. and M. College Report No. 3, 1S85. 



Silage vs. Dry Forage. 13 

was then replaced with some ground oats, and corn mixed. To 
our surprise, the grain was left undisturbed till the silage was all 
gone."* 

It has been stated by some farmers that their cattle preferred 
dry corn fodder to silage, but the evidence is so overwhelmingly 
against this assertion that we are inclined to believe that when 
such has been the case a good quality of silage was not used in 
the comparison. 

How much influence palatableness has on digestion, cannot 
be determined. That it is of importance in the lower animals, as 
well as in man, can hardly be questioned. 

t"The form in which a given food is supplied to animals, 
and even iis palatableness, may have a more decided influence in 
determining its nutritive value than slight differences in chemical 
composition. The same food may give different results when fed 
to different animals, and the benefit derived from it by the same 
may vary widely at different limes, so that extreme caution 
should be exercised in interpreting the results of feeding experi- 
ments, and in the generalization based upon them." 

It is essential to have the animal eat as much as possible in 
feeding to fatten, and in this respect silage seems to have a de- 
cided advantage over dry forage. 

The succulent condition of silage is no doubt of value. Stock 
feeders are agreed that cattle fed on silage have a more thrifty ap- 
pearance than when fed on dry forage alone. The hair becomes 
smooth, the bowels act promptly, and there is less liability to 
fever and constipation. "It is generally admitted that some form 
of succulent food is a valuable addition to the ordinary winter 
rations of live stock, and the question arises as to the best and 
cheapest method of providing it. The English farmer looks upon 
his root crop as an indispensable adjunct of his food supply 
for farm ntock, but in this country, for many reasons that need 
not be staled, the raising of root crops will not, in all probability, 
be extensively practised. . The steaming of feed of all kinds has 
been urged as the true solution of the problem, but this method 
has failed to gain the approval of a large majority of farmers, and 
where it has been tried on a considerable scale, it is apparently on 
the decline. "J 



*bilo anfi ^ilaae, by A. J. Cook, p. 7. 

fSilos, Ensilage and Silaae, by M . Miles, p 9J. 

|Silos, Ensilage and Sihige, by M. Miles, p. 94. 



14 Silage Crops and How to Grow Them. 

"Silage is much more digestible than dried food, and thus 
the beef animal fed on it looks much more sleek and lays on fat 
faster, the milk cow gives more and better milk ; all animals — 
cattle, horses, sheep and hogs — thrive upon it, and are more 
thrifty and healthy, because it ministers to their every need. Such 
men as F. D. Curtis, E. A. Powell and J. S. Woodward, of New 
York; J. Gould, of Ohio; and H. Smith, of Wisconsin, dairymen 
of the highest intelligence, who understand their business from A 
toZ, all unite in the assertion that it adds decidedly to both the 
quantity and quality of the milk. I recently saw in Secretary 
J. S. Woodward's barns, at lyockport, N. Y., a large herd of 
cattle which had been carefully divided in the fall into two lots, 
as uniform in condition as it was possible to make them. Each 
lot had been crowded to the utmost by free use of mixed grains. 
But one lot has had silage and the other the best of clover hay. 
Otherwise the treatment has been the same. This was a wonder- 
ful revelation. The cattle fed silage, in condition, both as to 
sleekness and fat, were surprisingly superior to the others. I 
said if all were turned into a yard I believed I could select all of 
the silage-led animals with hardly a mistake. ^ The other gentle- 
men present — Col. F. D Curtis, Hon. Seth Fenner and Prof. E- 
F. Ladd — were as sanguine of the same ability as was I."* 



*Silo and Silage, by Prof. A. J. Cook, pp. 6 and 7. 



CHAPTER III. 

Silage Crops and How to Grow Them. 

iJ^EARIyY all forage crops may be preserved in the silo, but, as 
<M!^ has been remarked, the special value of the sj^stem lies in 
ensilaging crops not readily cured as hay. Corn is the crop of all 
others in the United States where corn grows well, but in the 
dryer portions of the country and on the thin soils of the South- 
ern States, sorghum grows with more certainty and yields more 
feedstuff to the acre than corn. 

On good corn land — such as may be made to yield thirty to 
fifty bushels of corn to the acre — I prefer corn, even in the South. 
It may be grown with less labor, and I think has some advantage 
in keeping qualities. 



Silage Crops a7id Hozv to Grow Them. 



In feeding value there is probably no great difiference between 
corn and sorghum silage. So far as we can learn, no conclusive 
experiments have been made to determine this point. There 
seems to be as much or more variation in both corn silage and 
sorghum silage, due to different varieties and methods of growing 
and time of havesting, as there is between the two plants. 

The cultivation of the two plants is quite similar, except that 
sorghum is more tropical in its nature and will not bear as early- 
planting on cold, heavy soil as corn. Sorghum does not germi- 
nate as quickly as corn, and it does not grow off so rapidly and 
keep ahead of the grass and weeds. It requires, therefore, more 
labor on such land. 

Corn for silage is planted and worked very similar to the 
corn grown for the grain, but it may stand thicker on the ground. 
We do not agree with those who recommend planting the same 
for either purpose, as we believe that more nutritive matter will 
be produced where the stand is too thick to yield the largest 
amount of corn alone. 

In the Northern States corn has a dwarf habit of growth, and 
we j5nd but four to six square feet of ground given to each stalk. 
As we go south corn grows higher, the stalks grow larger, and 
from ten to twenty or more square feet are given to each stalk. 

The poorer the land the more room is required to enable the 
stalks to ear well. That the distance between stalks is not a 
question of latitude altogether, I have demonstrated in Missis- 
sippi. On land that would, under the best ordinary cultivation, 
produce forty bushels of corn, and where twelve square feet of land 
was thought to be the least space a stalk should occupy to ear 
well, I reduced the area to six square feet, and, by applying a 
moderate amount of fertilizer and giving good cultivation, in- 
creased the yield to seventy- five bushels of sound corn to the acre. 

Referring to growing corn for the grain and for forage. Prof. 
Shelton, of Kansas, says: "It is perfectly clear to me that we 
must raise corn for corn, with no thought of fodder, and com 
again which has no higher purpose than the production of fodder. 
We must, in short, have two cornfields on every farm, receiving 
radically different treatment, to correspond with the different pur- 
poses for which they are cultivated."* 



•Annual Report Kansas Experiment Station, iS88, p. 45. 



i6 Silage Crops and How to Grow Them. 

There is a limit, however, to thick planting. Sown broad- 
cast, corn will yield only one-half to two-thirds as much weight 
of crop as when planted in drills, and it will be of poorer quality. 
An experiment made at Cornell University Station demonstrates 
this point, and it agrees with the experience of farmers generally, 
who have tested both ways of planting.* 

From our own experience, and from what we can gather from 
others, we would say, do not plant so thick that the corn will not 
make small ears on at least half of the stalks. Some varieties will 
ear with stalks nearer than others, and all varieties we have ever 
tried will stand thicker and make more ears on well fertilized land 
than they will on poor soil. 

In growing corn for silage, the object is not simply weight of 
crop to the acre, but quantity of nutriment matter, and this, it is 
believed, may be best secured by planting as suggested, varying 
the thickness of the stand to conform to the variety and to the 
fertility of the soil. In Texas and Mississippi, on land that will 
produce from twenty-five to thirty bushels of cprn, we prefer to 
plant in rows four feet apart and have stalks average ten to twelve 
inches apart in the row, with large varieties of corn. Sorghum 
with rows the same, we would have the stalks not more than 
three or four inches apart. 

More weight of crop to the acre may be secured from thicker 
planting, but at the expense of quality. 

The method of planting will vary with the character of the 
soil. On loose, well drained soil we prefer to break broadcast and 
plant level. On dry, clean land, or after cotton on dry land, 
listing will save labor and time, and give as good results in crop. 

The method of listing in planting corn is very popular on 
the dry soils of some of the Western States, and special imple- 
ments are in use for the work. It consists in drilling the seed at 
the bottom of djeep furrows run off at the usual distance of the 
rows, on otherwise unplowed land, and breaking out the middles 
later. On heavy and not thoroughly drained land, where heavy 
spring rains prevail, we would plant in beds to insure a stand, 
and secure quick germination. 

Either single or double beds may be used, but the latter is 
preferred, as it permits more thorough breaking in throwing up the 



♦Growing Corn for Fodder and Ensilage, Bulletin No. 4, 1S8S. 



Silage Crops and How to Grow Them. 



17 



beds, and in the double beds 
seeds of weeds in the soil are 
thrown in between the rows 
where they may be destroyed 
with the cultivator after ger- 
mination, instead of under the 
rows, where they must be 
cleaned out bj- hand labor. 

Figure r shows the single 
beds. The soil is turned up, 
as shown by the shaded lines,, 
and the seeds of weeds in the 
land are left under the rows 
and in the best condition to 
grow. 

Figure 2 shows double beds 
where the weed seeds are 
thrown together between the 
rows, while under the rows the 
seeds are buried at the bottom 
of the furrows, and the crop 
will have sufficient lime to get 
well started off before the 
weeds come up. 

The furrow by the side ot 
each row dries and warms the 
soil around the seed nearly 
equal to the single bed, and 
the soil is left in better condi- 
tion for broadcast cultivation. 

After throwing up the beds 
with the plow they should be 
well harrowed to break up the 
clods and compress the soil. 

Figure 3 shows a home-made implement that will do good 
work after the harrow, in preparing the seed bed for planting. It 
is simply a stick of timber, ten to twelve inches square, and eight 
feet long, rigged up as shown in the cut. Only the front and bot- 
tom sides of the log need squaring. 




1 8- Silage Crops and How to Grow Thein. 




r/s.3 



Whatever method of preparation is adopted, the seed should 
be planted on the freshly prepared land while the soil is still 
moist, to secure germination before the weeds start. 

Corn may be planted by hand in an open furrow and covered 
with another furrow, but so much time is saved by using a 
planter, and the seed is so much more evenly distributed, that we 
would recommend using some one of the many planters now on 
the market. A common grain drill with all of the spouts but two 
plugged up does very good work, and may be used on the double 
beds described, and plant two rows at a time. 

The old saying, "A crop well planted is half worked," holds 
true with corn. It pays to have the ground well plowed, thor- 
oughly harrowed and made fine and compact before the seed is 
put in. Early planting is desirable in the Southern States, but 
not at the cost of poor preparation. 

For some years we have had occasion nearly every spring to 
break up and replant patches of early planted corn where the 
worms, wet weather or other causes have made a defective stand, 
and in nearly every case the part replanted has made a better 
crop than that planted two or three weeks earlier, and with less 
work to keep clean. 

The better growth is due to the extra plowing and better 
condition of the soil trom the double preparation. 

A da}^ or two after planting the ground should be harrowed 
broadcast, lengthwise or crosswise, with a large framed but light 



Silage Crops and How to Grow Them. 



19 



harrow,* having small teeth slanting backwards; again when the 
corn is coming up, and still again when it is three to four inches 
high. The Thomas smoothing harrow (Fig. 4) is designed espe- 




ciall)^ for this work, and we consider it indispensable to grow corn 
at the least cost. With this harrow fifteen to twenty acres may 
be gone over in a day. The grass and weeds may be kept down 
and the soil loosened on the surface until the corn is large 
enough to cultivate ; then use a one-horse cultivator that works 
the entire space between the rows at one bout, without "barring 
off," and breaking out the middles, as is practiced in 
many places^ or the two-horse implement that finishes the row at 
one time. 

The early cultivation of corn may be deep, but it is of no ad- 
vantage if the land is well prepared before planting. After corn 
is one and a half to two feet high deep cultivation seriously in- 
jures the crop. Figure 5 gives an idea of the root development 
of corn at this stage of growth. The upper roots are the principal 
feeders, and deep cultivation tears them off and cuts down the 
supply of plant food at the time most needed. A narrow bladed, 
long winged sweep, that will cut not more than two inches deep, 
is the best implement we have used for the late working. 

Corn and sorghum are two crops that ma}^ be grown with a 
great deal of certainty in all of the southern half of the country — 
corn on the richer and moist lands, sorghum in localities where 
summer drouths prevail and on the poorer soils. 



*l-laving Irom 64 to 72 or more teeth. 



20 



Varieties of Corn a?id Sorghum. 



With good preparation of the soil before planting, if it is not 
in good and clean condition, and shallow cultivation often enough 
to prevent the surface from crusting over, one or the other of these 
two crops is almost certain to make a fair 3aeld in any season, and 




T' J • ^ 



produce more feedstuff to the acre than can be gotten from any 
any other crop. The safe storage of these crops in the silo may 
also be counted on, which is not true of making hay, as good 
weather is one of the essentials in harvesting red clover, cow peas 
and the coarser grasses when cured in the dry form. 



Varieties of Corn a7id Sorghum. 21 

CHAPTER IV. 

VarietiHvS of Corn and Sorghum. 

HJUHE best variety of corn for silage is one that will grow large, 
w^ have plenty of leaves, and make ears when the stalks are 
near together. Large size of the stalks is not objectionable, as 
they are cut into small pieces and become softened in the silo, and 
will be readily eaten. 

For dry corn fodder the small-stalked varieties and the sweet 
corns are no doubt best, but as these will not yield so much, and 
the forage contains little if any more food material in proportion 
to weight after passing through the silo, they are not to be rec- 
ommended for silage in the Southern States, and they are being 
discarded at the North. 

We have planted the large varieties of Northern sweet corn 
several times but have never been able to get more than one-half 
the yield produced by varieties of Southern field corn. 

What effect planting the most prolific varieties of sweet corn 
for several years would have, we are not prepared to say, but it 
has been conclusively shown that northern sweet corn is not equal 
in value to common field corn in the Southern States for silage. 

While speaking of corn, we wish to call attention to the fact 
that southern varieties of corn contain more nutriment in propor- 
tion to weight than northern corn. The celebrated B. & W. corn, 
so largely grown in the Central and some of the Northern States, 
for silage, on account of its large ^aeld, is simply a white native 
field corn of Virginia. 

A number of tests have been made to compare southern with 
northern corn at the North, and when the warm season has been 
long enough to mature the southern corn, it has shown a larger 
amount of food element than the northern corn. Where it has 
not sufficiently matured it has not been of equal value. 

We extract the following from Wisconsin Experiment Station 
Bulletin No. 19, April, 1889. 

Nine varieties of corn were planted and handled in the same 
way, and cut September 5, before the large southern varieties were 
fully matured. 



22 



Varieties of Cofn and Sorghum. 



Table Showing the Weight of Green Fodder, Dry Matter, Sugar 
and Protein per Acre: 



Varieties. 





c 






k. 


u 




o 






O 


'"' 




c 


CO 




(U 






(U . 


C 




■- OJ 


r3 




O^; 


.J 




-< 


Cu (u 


o 




1^ 


Q 


^ 


H 


'=»ept.s 


26.200 


8.3^2 


" S 


33'=^7'^ 


10.160 


" s 


22,69 ■ 


5-526 


■' c 


39,800 


9,028 


" S 


3 '-490 


7.7S5 


' 5 


43700 


1 1 ,060 




37-390 


9,906 


" s 


42,060 


14,070 


'* c 


3^890 


10,1150 



bJ3 


^ 




tl, 


Crt 




10 


X 


•n 


C 
















Cu 


Cu 



King Phillip (.flint) 

Smedley (large yellow dent) 

Evergreen Sweet 

B. & W 

Sibley's Sheep Tooth 

Southern Ensilage 

Normandy White Giant . . 

Southern Horse Tooth 

Fargo Bros.' Ensilage .... 



9S2.4 

'393-0 
85ii 6 
1329.0 
1182.0 
1877.0 
1237 o 
2419 o 

I^IO.O 



572.0 

352.0 

474 I 
437-5 
697.7 

62q.O 

984 7 

634 -3 



"It is seen from the table that at the date of cutting, Septem- 
ber 6, the value of the corn, according to the j-ield of dry matter, 
would be in the following order, beginning with the highest: 

Southern Horse Tooth. 
Southern Ensilage. 
Smedley Dent. 
Normandy White Giant. 
Fargo Bros.' Ensilage. 

6. B. & W. Ensilage. 

7. Sibley's Sheep Tooth. 
8 King Phillip. 

9. Evergreen Sweet. 

"Although the Southern Ensilage is slightly ahead of the 
Smedley Dent in actual pounds of dry matter produced, yet the 
greater maturity of the Smedley would place it second in the list, 
if ranked according to feeding value. 

"While the above figures would indicate that the sweet and 
flint corns were of rather low value for the silo, yet one must take 
into account the fact that the summer of 1888 was exceptionally 
favorable to the growth of the southern and adverse to the north- 
ern varieties. Another season may reverse the figures, especially 



Varieties of Corn and Sorghum. 



if it is a cold, rainy one. It is evident from the table that marked 
difference in composition, as well as yield, exists between the 
northern and southern corns ; also that the weight of green fod- 
der per acre is no indication of the true value of the corn. The 
large, rank-growing corns (B. & W. and Fargo Bros.' ensilage), 
while giving in one case 5000 and in the other 6000 pounds more 
green fodder to the acre, yet gave no more nutritive matter than 
the Smedley, a yellow dent variety of the Pride of the North type, 
suitable for northern Illinois, but a little too large and late for a 
general field crop in this vicinity. We must, therefore, in judg- 
ing of the value of a corn, take into account the time necessary for 
its maturity. It is necessar)^ that the corn be far advanced toward 
ripening, and that it be sufficiently matured to have obtained its 
maximum of growth without having lost its succulence. This 
condition is obtained when the kernel of the ear is glazed so as 
not to be easily dented with the nail. Besides having a greater 
feeding value, corn that has been allowed to mature to the point 
of glazing has nearly twice as much nutritive matter to the ton as 
that cut when the ears are just beginning to show the tas.sel." 

What this showing would have been if the later southern 
corns had been allowed to reach the stage of maturit}- of the 
Smedley dent xx\a.y be inferred from the quotation, but we have 
direct evidence to show that they would have been of considera- 
ble more value. This point will be referred to later, under the 
discussion of "When to Harvest." 

For several years we have noticed that our cattle would not 
eat as many pounds of silage per day as cattle consumed in the 
Northern States, although some of our cattle were brought from 
the Northern States. 

The ration recommended by Northern cattle feeders is from 
50 to 75 pounds of silage per day, with grain, and reports are not 
uncommon of large cows and steers eating as high as 100 pounds 
of silage. With a few exceptions 40 pounds of southern-grown 
silage is the maximum amount we have been able to get steers or 
cows to eat per day. 

L,ast winter, at the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, 
twenty-four Texas steers ranging from 800 to 900 pounds, live 
weight, consumed on the average, each, daily, through the feed- 
ing test, less than twenty-two pounds of silage per day, with from 
one and a half to six pounds of hay and grain or cotton seed, and 
cotton seed meal, and made an average gain of over two pounds 



24 



Varieties of Corn and Soi'ghum. 



per day for eighty-three days. Running over several years work 
in our feeding, the average amount of silage consumed per head 
per day, with grain, is under thirty-five pounds, yet we get as 
large gain in weight, and yield of milk and butter as is reported 
from feeding fifty pounds of northern grown silage, and an equiva- 
lent amount of-grain.f 

Investigations made by Mr. H. H. Harrington, Chemist 
of the Texas Station, throw some light on the question of com- 
parative values of northern and southern grown silage/'^ 

Twenty-two analyses were made of the silage during the feed- 
ing test of last winter, and to compare with the average of these, 
analyses of silage in Northern States were collated with the follow- 
ing results, t 

Average Analyses of Corn Silage, from Experinent Stations of 
Massachusetts, Coyinecticut, Wisconsin, Maryland and Texas : 




An examination of the above table will show that our silage 
contains 70 per cent, more dry matter, twice as much crude fibre 
and fat, more than double the amount of protein, and 50 per cent, 
more nitrogen free extract than silage grown in the North. 

The larger amount of the chemical constituents represents so 
much more nutritive matter, and, if the results of this investiga- 
tion are corroborated by further analyses, the reason why cattle 
make as great return from one pound of southern silage as they 



*Bulletin No. 6, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. 
■f-Texas Expt. Station Bulletin No. 6, pp. 2S, 29, 30. 



Varieties of Coin a^id Sorghum. 25 

do from one and a half to two pounds of northern grown silage is 
explained. 

All authorities agree that the most nutritious silage is made 
from corn that is nearly matured, and the difficult)^ that confronts 
the farmer of the Northern States is to get a prolific variety of 
corn that will become sufiiciently matured before frost. We, of 
course, have no trouble from early frosts in the South, and can, 
therefore, let corn mature to any stage we desire. 

It seems probable also, from what we can learn of southern 
varieties of corn growm in the Northern States, that is, from 
planting southern grown seed, that the corn has greater inherent 
nutritive value than northern varieties where it has opportunity 
to mature. 

It w^ould seem that either our climate or the long seasons 
and method of harvesting which has permitted corn to thoroughly 
ripen on the stalk for years, has developed in it greater food value 
than is possessed by corn growm in a higher latitude. We refer 
to the"" food value of the entire plant — stalk, leaf and ear. 

We have dwelt on the value of southern corn simply from a 
desire to show that the Southern States possess superior facilities 
for supplying food for live stock, and especially in the use of the 
silo. 

Sorghum 

We cannot speak positively in ifegard to the comparative 
merits of different varieties of sorghum. 

For making hay the smaller varieties, such as the earlj^ am- 
ber, are preferred. In Kansas, and in some parts of Texas, the 
non-saccharine sorghums are quite largely planted for forage, and 
it is claimed that some of them are better adapted to poor land 
and dry seasons than the sweet sorghums. 

Kaffir corn is perhaps the most prolific of all sorghums in 
seed production, 3-ielding from twent3--five to fiftj' or more bushels 
to the acre, but the stalks are hard and woody. After growing 
quite a number of these sorghums, including Kaffir corn, Doura, 
chicken corn and some other plants that have been extensively 
advertised and lauded, such as Pearl millet and Teosinte, we have 
not been so well satisfied with any of them as with the Orange, 
Honduras and other large, sweet sorghums for silage. 

In weight of crop to the acre, possibh' Teosinte will surpass 
the sorghums, but it does not seed before frost, even in Texas, 



26 Harvesting the Crop. 

and starts off very slowly in the spring, requiring more cultiva- 
tion than the sorghums. It is a coarse, woody plant, and, in our 
limited experience, not very palatable to cattle. 

From our present knowledge, we are not disposed to recom- 
mend any of these new forage plants as being better, or even 
equal to the sweet sorghums for silage, and of the latter we prefer 
the large varieties, but would plant thicker than if growing for 
syrup or for seed alone. 



CHAPTER V. 
Harvesting the Crop. 

^|j||HE farmers of the country are skilled in growing and harvest- 
W^ ing corn, and their experience will enable them to carry the 
crop grown for silage to the time it is ready to harvest, for the 
cultivation to this point is very similar. 

The great weight of the crop calls for skillful management in 
harvesting, or the cost of handling will out balance the gain from 
the ensilage system. 

The proper time to hai^vest corn has received some attention 
from our experiment stations, and as the results obtained from 
different states agree we may accept them with confidence. 

Best Period for Cutting. 

"For this test, from a field of Sibley's Pride of the North 
Corn, planted in hills, fair average hills were selected at different 
times, cut and weighed, and a sample sent to the laboratory for 
analysis. At the same time a number of hills sufficient to give a 
fair average of the yield per acre were also cut and weighed. In 
this way both the yield per acre and the quality were ascertained. 
The corn was planted on May 7th, the first cutting was made on 
July 24th, at which time the plants were just coming into bloom. 
The second cutting was made August 8th, when the corn was 
hardly in the roasting ear condition. The third cutting was made 
September 3rd, at which time the majority of the ears were out 
of the milk, and in one weeks' time the adjoining corn was ready 



Harvesting the Crop. 



27 



to cut and shock. Below are given the results: 



Period. 


Date of 

Cultino:, 


Yield lbs, 
per acre 

18 762 


Percent 
Water 


Dry Matter 

pounds 
per acre , 

2 000 


Protein 
pounds 
per acre, 

250 6 


Fat lbs. 
per acre. 


Carb -hy- 
drates 
lbs per acre 


I. 


July 24. 


8934 


42, 


'543 6 


II, 


Aug. S. 


24 S/S 


S3 57 


4 039 


363 4 


Si. 9 


33^8 9 


III. 


Sept. 3. 


27 674 _ 


73 93 


72 142 


ssss 


'99 I 


6166,7 



"It will at once be seen that the most marked difference in 
the composition of the fodder cut at the different periods consists 
in the constant and rapid decrease in the amount of water. While 
the gross yield increased only about 50 per cent from July 24th to 
September 3rd, the amount ot dry matter increased more than 350 
per cent."* 

At the Pennsylvania Experiment Station, with ten varieties 
of corn, similar results were obtained. We copy weights of two 
varieties of corn from the reportif 







vieijD per acre 




Variety of Corn. 


IT. 

-0 

'ij 

X 

a) 



w 

'5c 5 

Xi D- 


bib 
"n 
M r. 

£ 9 

1, — 1 


5" 


Chester County Mammoth: 

F^resh Green Corn 

Drv Matter 

<-^ ,j T-> t (Fresh Green Corn .... 
Golden Dent - t^ ,t ,, 

Drv Matter 


26,670 

3-392 

21,300 

2,633 


32,250 

4.. 33 
26,670 

3-825 


32.620 
5,690 

30950 
5-344 


1 5.768 

7.381 

15,280 
7-095 





In the report referred to, Mr. Caldwell summarizes as follows, 
referring to the results obtained in Pennsylvania and New York. 
Letting 100 represent the dry matter per acre of corn cut when in 
tassel, the gain would be shown by the following figures; 



State. 


First Period 


Second Period 


Third Period 


Fourth Period 


Pennsylvania . 
New York ... 


100 
100 


153 

202 


212 
36. 


325 



♦Cornell University Experiment Station Bulletin, No. 4, p. 52. 

-i-Annual Report, State College Experiment Station, Penn., 1SS8, pp. 2S-9. 



28 Harvesting the Crop. 



The very marked increase of dry matter after corn tassels 
shows how much food material is lost in cutting at this stage of 
growth. 

A larger proportion of the dry matter at the first stage may be 
digested, but if the food is palatable to the animal, so that he will 
eat it clean when cut at the time the corn is nearly or fully ripe, 
the difference in digestibility cannot be very great. 

So far as the qualiity of the silage made from corn cut at the 
different periods is concerned, all who have had experience agree 
that the early cut makes sour silage, and more of it spoils, while 
the corn cut nearly ripe, after the kernels are hard, makes sweet 
silage, and it keeps better in the silo, and is more palatable to 
cattle. 

There can be no question but that silage from matured corn 
is a more desirable feed stuff in every respect than the watery, im- 
mature stuff made from corn cut when in the tasseling stage. 

So much has been said in regard to early cut corn and other 
hays, as well as to early cut fodder corn, that the opinion prevails 
that all early cut forage is superior to the same matured. If a 
large variet}^ of field corn is allowed to ripen and then cut and 
shocked and afterwards fed out whole, not more than one-half 
will be eaten, and hardly that by well fed cattle. Such forage 
would be much improved, no doubt, by cutting before the stalks 
become dry and woody, but mature corn stalks dried in the shock, 
and silage from the same, packed in the silo when fresh cut, are 
very different materials. 

The first is not much more palatable to the animal than so 
much dry brush, while the latter is eaten with relish. 

We have no complete data at hand as to the changes that 
take place in the feeding value of sorghum from the time it blos- 
soms until the seed is ripe. The quantity of sugar increases up 
to full maturity, and the same is no doubt true of all the food ele- 
ments. 

We have found that sorghum ensilaged when the seeds were 
getting hard, keeps better and makes sweeter silage than when 
cut earlier, but if it is allowed to get over ripe, or is put in the 
silo when very dry, it becomes dry and must3^ 

We prefer to cut cow peas, either for hay or to ensilage, about 
the time the first pods begin to ripen, and we would put in red 
clover at the same time it is cut for hay. 

For cutting down corn and sorghum in the fields, mowers 



Harvesting the Crop. 29 



and reapers have been used, but with heavy crops, cutting by 
hand with a corn knife is generally practiced. We prefer the 
knife shown in Figure 6 to the straight handle and blade. 




^''^.6 



We cut and throw three rows together on the ground, in 
bundles as large as a man can pick up, stalks straight, butts even 
and all one way. 

The bundles are not bound. A wagon with a wide frame is 
driven close to the bundles and the corn picked up and laid 
straight, crosswise of the wagon, butts all in one direction. 

An ordinary farm wagon with hay rack will require a man 
on the wagon to load, and the lifting from the ground to the 
wagon is heavy and slow work. A truck wagon with low wheels 
is a great improvement on the ordinary farm wagon, but the ar- 
rangement shown in Figure 7 is the best thing we know of for 
hauling the crop from the field. 

The running gear of any farm wagon may be used. The 
pieces supporting the bed may be round poles, or sawed stuff 4x6 
and 17 feet long. They may be attached to the rear axle with 
chains, or an iron rod passing over the axle and through the 
poles, with taps below. 



Harvesting the Crop. 




A false bolster, a, (Fig. 8) is attached to the front axle with 
chains, heavy wire, rope, or clevis made for the purpose. A king 



Harvesting the Ctop. 



31 



bolt, shown in the cut, passes through the false bolster and the 
block bolted between the head pieces of the frame. The king 
b.olt should be \%. inches in diameter, and fit loosely in the hole 
through bolster and block, or it will be liable to break, as it has 
to support a heavy load and horizontal strain. The frame should 
be six or seven feet wide ; cross pieces, 2x4 stuff; planks on top, 
1x6; standards to keep the load from the wheels, are 2x4, and may 




^'^.^ 



be attached with )^-inch carriage bolts and turned down flat out 
of the way when no load is on the bed. The front end of hounds 
on rear axle is attached to the cross piece on the frame. The 
pole, or wagon tongue, must be fastened to hounds on front axle 
in such way as to make it stiff, to keep the axle from turning. 
The lower side of bed pieces should be six or eight inches above 
the ground, so that the frame will not drag when the wheels run 
into a depression. 

The load being carried so low, a man may stand on the 
ground and easily lay on as much green corn, or sorghum, as the 
team can haul, doing away with the necessity of a man on the 
wagon to load 

This rack will be found convenient for hauling hay from the 
field when a horse fork is used for unloading, and save a good 
deal of the heaviest work in the hay field. 

When the wagon is loaded it should be driven close to the 
rear end of the cutter table, butts of the stalks toward the cutter, 
so that the forage may be drawn straight from the wagon and 
run through the machine without lifting and turning it around. 



32 Haj'vesting the Crop. 

To carry out this arrangement the belt from the cutter should 
run forward to the pulley on horse power or jack, which should 
stand between the cutter and the silo. If there is not room between 
the cutter and the silo for the horse power, or engine, with the 
carrier straight ahead, an angle carrier may be used and the cutter 
stand parallel with the front side of the silo. 

It is essential to have the cutter stand so that the loaded 
wagon may be driven up to the rear end of the cutter table, and 
the stalks moved straight forward on the table. The cutter should 
rest on the ground, or on a platform level with the ground, so that 
there will not be much lifting of the forage to get it on to the 
table. 

We have dwelt on the loading of the wagon, and unloading 
on the table of the cutter, because this is the heav}^ and costly 
labor of the ensilage system. The handling of a crop weighing 
from ten to twenty or more tons to the acre is no small matter, 
and unless special care is taken to have everything arranged in the 
most convenient manner the cost of filling the silo will be greatly 
increased. 

In handling a large crop we prefer to use three wagons and 
two teams. This allows one wagon in the field loading, one going 
from field to cutter while the other is being unloaded on the cut- 
ter. The men at the cutter move the wagon out of the waj' as 
soon as the load is off. The load from the field is left behind the 
machine and team taken off and hitched to the empty wagon to 
go after the next load. 

The hands required to keep everything moving are, one man 
to feed the cutter, one to pass the forage to him from the wagon, 
a man to help load in the field, and a man with each team — the 
drivers to help load the wagons — two men to cut down the corn 
in the field, one man to level the chopped forage in the silo and 
tramp the edges and corners, and one man to look alter the en- 
gine or horse power. With the field near the silo, and sufficient 
power to run the cutter up to its capacity, this force of nine men 
should put in forty tons a day in ten hours, provided everything 
is managed so there will be no delays. 

The Cutter. 

There are quite a number of good feed cutters manufactured. 
We have used the cycle cutters, with the knives attached to the 
balance wheel, of which the Belle City is the type, and therevolv- 



Harvesting the Cfop. 33 



ing knife head cutters, like the Ross, Silver Deming and others. 
We will not say that these machines are all equally good and dur- 
able, but we do not hesitate to affirm, after having used some five 
different makes, that more depends on having all the taps tight 
on the cutter, and a careful feeder who will be on the lookout lor 
sticks, monkey-wrenches and other things that seem to have a 
propensity for getting into the forage, than on the particular 
make of the machine. 

The knives must be carefully watched, for if they get loose 
something will be apt to break. The journals should be kept 
well oiled and knives sharpened as often as they become dull. 
The cutters all have carrier attachment, and the carrier is an es- 
sential part, unless the silo is in a basement and <"he cutter can 
stand above it. 

The carrier should be long enough to extend up over the silo 
wall and one-third of the distance across the silo, so that the cut 
forage will drop in the center of the pit. If the silo is filled rapidly 
the cut forage should be well tramped down next to the walls and 
in the corners. If but two or three feet in depth of forage is put 
in each day it is well to let it pile up in the center of the pit and 
let it lie until the next morning in a loose heap, when it will be 
well warmed up, and then pitch the hot forage over against the 
walls, tramping it down as it is thrown over. 

There need be no hurry about filling if the crop is not ripen- 
ing rapidly, and stopping two or three days while filling will do 
no harm. If a break down occurs and the work has to stop for 
more than three days, level off the forage and cover with six 
inches of hay or straw. This covering should be thrown out 
when filling commences again. 

We have stopped nine days with the silo half full, waiting 
for a later planted crop to ripen, without any apparent injury to 
the silage. Fill to the top of the silo walls, and after the cut for- 
age has settled for a day or two fill up again, and repeat the pro- 
cess until settling has ceased before putting on the covering. In 
a silo twenty feet deep the silage will settle five or six feet if filled 
rapidly, and refilling three or four times inside of two weeks will 
be necessary to have the silo remain nearly full after settling 
ceases. 

We have stated that a layer of two feet of cut straw or old 
hay is as good a cover as anything, and that this layer of stuff 
will become moldy and unfit for food. If no cover is put on, the 



34 The Silo. 

cut forage will simply spoil down for a foot or more, and this will 
act as a cover for the silage below. 

lyENGTH OF Cut. 

We have found no advantage in cutting the forage very short. 
The finel}' cut may pack more closely- together, but cutting one 
and a half inches in length seems to answer as well as cutting 
finer. We left two of the knives off from our four-knife cutter last 
summer, and we find the silage is relished by the cattle, and 
keeps as well as w4ien cut finer, and the capacity of the cutter is 
much increased. 

Not more than three-fourths of the capacity claimed in the 
catalogues for the different sizes of cutters need be expected with 
average management, and at least one-third more power should 
be provided than they state is necessary. 



CHAPTER VI. 

The S11.0. 

^E present the plan of a silo which differs in construction from 
vJ^iMl the wooden silos built in some portions of the country, in 
having several horizontal girts in place of vertical studding, as 
in house building. 

Our first w^ooden silo was built in this way. The horizontal 
frame work was suggested from the construction of the bins in 
grain elevators, where the resistance against side pressure has re- 
ceived a good deal of attention. 

Our first silo had brick walls, thirteen inches thick, laid in 
Portland cement, and it was nine feet deep, one-half in the ground. 
The second 3'ear we built a wooden frame work on top of the 
brick wall, making the silo eighteen feet deep. The silo was 
filled with chopped corn sixteen feet, and in a few days the brick 
wall cracked near the ground, and if we had not discovered it at 
once, the entire wall on one side would have fallen out. We se- 
cured the wall with strong props, but the cracks spread sufii- 
ciently to cause considerable loss of silage next to the wall. Two 
years later a silo twenty feet deep, fifteen feet square inside, with 
ten-inch square posts at each corner, aud 6x10 horizontal girts, 
filled with wet and rather green corn, gave way at one of the cor- 



The Silo- 



35 



ners, and the 6xio girts sprung five inches in the centre. The 
silo was saved only by heavy props. 

In 1888 Prof. Shelton, of the Kansas Agricultural College, 
made some experiments with the dynamometer to determine the 
pressure against the walls of a silo, and found, twenty feet from 
the surface, with corn fodder cut in one-half inch lengths, the 
pressure was fifty-seven pounds to the square foot of wall. 

Reasoning from this determination, Dr. Miles, referring to 
silos with vertical studding, says : "From the data thus furnished 
it will be safe to use 2x4 inch studs for a wall 12 feet high. 2x6 
inch studs for a wall 14 feet high, and 2x8 studs for a wall 16 feet 
high, if they are in each case placed ftom :6 to 18 inches apart 
from center to center, and sheathed on the inside by two thick- 
nesses of inch boards, The sizes given are in fact considerably in 
excess of what is actuall}^ required to secure stabilit}', if reason- 
able eare is exerci-sed in other details of construction."* 

In our own opinion, the pressure against the walls is not al- 
togethor a question of depth of the silo, or fineness of cut, and 
therefore cannot be estimated as in a grain bin, or tank for liquids, 
therefore we do not place much reliance on a single test to deter- 
mine this point. 

With three connected silos, we have noticed that there is no 
regularit}^ in the pressure shown by the bulging out of the walls. 
We have made no tests to learn what causes the unusual pressure 
at times, or to determine its extent, but our observation has led 
us to believe that quite green or wet corn may produce a much 
heavier pressure against the walls than mature or partially cured 
corn, but not in proportion to difference in weight, and that for- 
age rapidly filled in exerts more pressure than when filled slowly. 
There seems to be no regularity, as with two silos fiilled together 
on alternate days, and with the same material, we have had one 
or two years, one to bulge out while the walls of the other would 
not spring perceptibly. 

We are inclined to believe the pressure is largely due to the 
formation of gasses seeking an outlet, and not to the weight of 
the mass, but, as already intimated, this is a mere supposition, 
for which we have no experimental proof. 

With the horizontal girts, the greatest strength and simplic- 
ity of construction is secured with the least material in the frame 
work, unless the silo is made round, and the girts are made in the 

*Silos, Ensilage and Silage, by M. Miles, p. 7. 



36 



1 he Silo. 



form of hoops of several one-inch planks, one over the other, 
lapped and solidly nailed together. This method of building is 
suggested by one of our Texas correspondents, but we have not 
seen it tried. 




V 



The Silo. 



37 



Figure 9 shows the frame work and lining of a double silo, 
each pit 18 feet square inside and 20 feet deep. The outside girts 
are made of 2x10x20 feet planks, three planks in each girt, ex- 
cept the top girt, or plate, which has but two. The girts in the 
cross wall are made of 2x8 planks, 




The corner framing is shown in Figure 1 1 , with the cross 
braces of 2x6 stuff (a a). These braces are put in to dispense 
with the right-angle inside corners, but at the same time they 



« 




strengthen the corner joints and the intersection of the cross walls 
with the outside (Fig. 12), 

The doors are shown, a <2, Eig. 9, and detail of door Fig. 10. 
i' s. Fig. II, are 2x6 pieces sawed square at the ends and put in as 
the frame work is built up, to support the girts. 



38 The Silo. 

It will be noticed there is no mortise and tenon work. The 
planks are simply sawed off square and spiked together with 20b 
and \ob nails. Two half-inch bolts should be put through the 
planks at the corner of each girt and at the intersection of cross 

wall. 

Figure 12 shows how the ends of the planks of the outside 
girts lap over the cross wall girt center plank, on either side, 
above and below. The laps should be well spiked from above 
and below, after the frame is up, so that they cannot draw apart. 

The silos are lined double inside with 1x12x20 feet planks ex- 
tending from bottom of silo to top of plate. The planks are laid 
to break joints, as shown in Figure g. It is well to have the lin- 
ing planks dressed on one side, so that they will be of even thick- 
ness and lay smooth, but this is not essential. The inner planks 
should be of good, sound lumber, all heart if it can be procured. 

Between the lining planks a layer of tarred building paper is 
placed to make the wall air tight. Dressed and matched flooring 
or ceiling is no better than good, common 1x12 planks for the 
lining. The lining will swell up tight when the moist forage is 
put into the silo. The lining planks should be well nailed to 
each girt, eight-penny nails in the outer plank and ten-penny 
nails in the inner. 

Bill of Material. 

FEET. 

105 pieces 2 x 10 x 20 ft. sills, girts and plates 3)500 

18 " 2 X 8 X 20 " " " " cross wall . 540 

35 " 2 X 6 X 18 " supports and cross corner braces . 630 

300 " I X 12 X 20 lining planks 6,000 

44 " 2 X 4 X 14 rafters 462 

1x4 roof sheeting 800 

11,932 
3,000 Square feet tarred building paper. 
10 M Shingles. 
75 /^''x 7" Iron bolts. 
150 >^" Washers. 

1 Keg 40-penny nails. 

2 Kegs 20 penny nails. 
2 Kegs lo-penny nails. 

1 Keg 8-penny nails. 
30 pounds 4-penny nails. 

Brick foundation wall 12 inches thick, iS inches high: 

4,500 Bricks. 

2 Barrels lime. 

2 Barrels cement. 



The Silo. 39 



Construction. 



Build the silo on dry ground, on a slight elevation, so that 
water will not stand near the walls. Dryness may be secured by 
cutting a ditch a foot deep around the silo, if the ground is flat. 
A 12-inch brick or stone wall six inches high above ground, and 
foundation below frost line, for the sills to rest on, will make the 
best job, but when the means are limited lay the sills on blocks, 
four inches above the ground, and after the silo is built lay a 
IX 1 2 plank on edge inside against the lining, and fill the floor 
with dirt up to the bottom of the sills. When the silo is emptied 
pull the dirt back from the walls, so that the air will pass under, 
filling in again before putting in the next crop. With a brick or 
stone foundation, fill with dirt nearly to the top of the wall. If 
the sills rest on a wall the sills should be anchored to the wall 
at the center, with a ^-inch bolt bedded in the wall and passing 
up through the sill at the side of each silo, to hold the sill from 
springing out on the wall and letting in air. A short piece of 2x4 
stuff bedded lengthwise in the wall, flush with the top, to which 
the lower plank of the sills may be spiked, will answer the same 
purpose. 

Having the material on the ground, commence with the 
planks for the plates. Saw them the proper length and lay on 
the ground at one side of where the silo is to stand, in the same 
position they will occupy in the silo. Continue with the planks 
for the girt next below the sill, and so on till all the planks are 
fitted and the girts piled one above the other, the sills on top. 
The inside edges should be plumb and even. 

By this method, laying each plank in place as soon as fitted, 
no mistake need be made, even by one who has but little mechan- 
ical skill. After all the pieces are cut and in place, take off the 
upper run of planks, cross wall and all, which will be the lower 
run of the sill, lay it on the foundation and see that it is level. 
Follow with the second plank, spike together at intervals of two 
feet with 20-penny nails, and then the third plank, and spike 
with 40-penny nails, and the sill is complete. Cut up the 2x6 
supports (5, Fig. 11), 23 pieces 2 feet 6 inches long, set up in 
place and toe nail with lo-pennj' nails. 

Lay on first run of planks of first girt, and spike on top of 
2x6 supports. See that it lies plumb with the sill, and stay with 



40 The Silo. 

temporary strips on the outside. Proceed as directed until the 
frame is all up, taking pains to see that each girt is plumb with 
those below, and braced or stayed sufficiently to hold it rigidly in 
place. 

The second run of 2x6 supports {s. Fig. 11) are 3 feet long, 
third run 3 feet 6 inches, fourth run 3 feet 9 inches, fifth and last 
run 4 feet 5 inches. The supports either side of the doors should 
stand plumb one above the other, but a slight variation will not 
matter with the others. 

After the frame is up, put on first laj^er of lining planks and 
follow with the tarred paper. We prefer to cut the rolls of paper 
into lengths of 20 teet and 6 inches, and tack up the strips verti- 
cally. I^et the edges lap about two inches and use just enough 
6-ounce tacks to support the paper, and follow with the inside 
lining plank, breaking joints with the outer plank. 

A few planks will have to be ripped to fit in the corners and 
not have one crack come over another. 

If the planks are seasoned and dry, it will add to the dura- 
bility of the lining to paint the inside with hot coal tar. 

If coal tar is used it should be boiled down until it will 
get nearly hard when cold. If the planks are green leave off the 
paint until the next summer. 

The tar ma}^ be put on with a swab made of a rag tied on the 
end of a stick. Tarred paper should be put between the planks 
on the doors, and it is well to tack strips of paper over the cracks 
around the doors when filling the silo. 

The silo is shown without a roof in order to display the inner 
construction. A good roof is one of the essentials, and it may be 
of whatever style is most convenient, but if quite flat, it should 
rest on a second plate three feet above the silo wall proper, to 
allow room for tramping the silage next to the wall. 

The floor of the silo may be covered with brick, cemented or 
grouted, but a dirt floor answers very well if it is higher than the 
ground outside, so that it will keep dry. If the ground is sandy 
It will be well to cover tne floor with three or four inches of clay, 
moistened and packed down solid. 

The roof the silo should project two feet all around, to throw 
the water away from the building and to keep the foundation dry. 

In the Gulf States the building need not be weather-boarded, 
so far as the silage is concerned, but from the central to the north- 
ern part of the country the outside should be sheeted and bat- 



The Silo. 



41 



tened, and in the extreme north, building felt should be tacked on 
to the girts under the sheeting to protect the silage from frost. 

A Cheap Silo. 

For Jhe benefit of those who desire a cheap silo, we submit 
a plan which provides for posts set in the ground (Fig. 16). The 




plan shows a silo 16x16 feet inside and 18 feet deep. The posts 
are round poles hewed straight on one side. [The posts are 
shown squared in the drawing.] The bill of material includes 
lumber and shingles. 



42 



The Silo. 




Fig. 17. 

BitvL OF Material. 

56 Planks, I X 12 x iS outside lining and corners .... 1,008 
112 " I X 12 X 16 Inside lining 1,792 

24 " 2x4x18 outside corners and between posts . 288 
8 " 2 X 10 X 18 plates 240 

20 " 2 X 4 X 12 rafters . 160 

Strips roof sheeting 250 

3,738 
Shingles, 5 squares 4,000 

16 Posts 21 feet long, 6 inches in diameter at upper end, sur- 
faced one side, corner and door posts surfaced two sides. 
15 pounds 40-penny Nails. 
20 pounds 20-penny Nails. 
50 pounds lo-penny Nails. 
50 pounds 8-penn5^ Nails. 
12 pounds 4-penny Nails. 



The Silo. 43 

Specifications. 

Silo 1 6 feet square inside, i8 feet from ground to lower side 
of plates. 

Raise the ground floor of the silo six inches higher than the 
surrounding ground by filling in, or a ditch may be dug around 
the silo after it is built. 

If round posts are used for posts, surface and line two adja- 
cent sides of six posts for the corners and each side of the door, 
and one side of the remaining ten posts. 

Lay off on the ground and dig holes for the posts, making 
them some larger than the butt ends, so that the posts may be 
lined on the inner surfaced sides. Set up all the posts so that the 
faces on each side of the silo are in line, and form a square i6^ 2^^ 
inside of silo ; plumb and stay lath, taking pains to see that the 
posts on each side are in line bottom and top. 

Set posts on sides of door to leave space between, of three feet, 
and see that the sides that form the door jambs are plumb and 
parallel. 

Saw off upper ends of posts level, put on lower plank of plate 
and spike well to each post ; lay on upper plank, spike corners 
firmly and over each post. 

Put on lower outside lining plank, ends extend out on corner 
posts on two sides to make corners solid, as shown in detail of 
corner in Figure 17, and put up 2x4 pieces between posts. These 
pieces are put in to keep plank from warping when silo is empt5^ 

Spike two four-inch pieces on surfaced side of posts on sides 
of door, inner edge fluvsh with inner surfaced side of posts. 

Sheet up with outside lining plank, cutting out 2d-3, 5-6, 
8-9, 11-12, 14-15, 17-18 planks from bottom, even with center of 
edge of 2x4^^ forming door jambs. See that the pieces are cut ex- 
actly the same length, and that the openings left are same width, 
and that the pieces will just fit in loosety. 

Cover plank with tarred paper, edges lapping two inches, 
put on inner lining plank, ripping plank for bottom, so that the 
outer and inner linings will break joints. Inner lining plank butt 
together in corners. 

Cut off all the inner lining plank over holes left for doors two 
inches longer on each side, so as to make a lap joint when the 
pieces are put in. These pieces si5ould all be of the same length, 
so they will fit any part of the opening. 



44 The Silo 

Saw up IX 12" plank, pieces 20" long-, ends beveled to fit, 
and nail in the corners as shown at b, Figure 16; cover with pa- 
per, extend out on wall two inches, then cut more plank to fit 
outside of first, breaking joints as with the siding. 

Fill in floor with earth at least three inches upon plank lin- 
inglbefore filling with forage, and when silo is emptied rake dirt 
back from plank until read}^ to fill again. 

Capacity of the Silo. 

The first plan given shows a double silo, to illustrate the 
method of building two or more silos attached together. 

A single silo may be constructed on the plan shown, or a silo 
may be fitted up in a barn or other building. 

The size of the silo may vary to suit the requirements of the 
farm or herd, but we would rather have two medium sized silos 
than one quite large one. If large — twenty feet or more in length 
or width — a heavy frame will be required, as no ties can be put 
crosswise inside to support the walls. A rod or beam through 
the mass of silage will make an open air space as the forage set- 
tles, and cause the silage around it to rot. With the horizontal 
frame work shown in the first plan, the silo may be any depth de- 
sired without requiring heavier material to sustain the pressure, 
and as a deep silo will have greater capacity in proportion to in- 
side measure than a shallow silo, owing to the greater compres- 
sion of the contents, we would prefer to have the silo deep rather 
than have it long or wide. 

In feeding out the silage we prefer to take off the entire cov- 
ering and remove a layer of the silage from the entire surface each 
day. With a very large silo this would not be practicable, unless 
a large herd of cattle is fed. 

The weight of a cubic foot of silage in the silo will vary with 
the depth of the mass and with the condition of the forage when 
put in. If the crop is harvested when nearly matured, or if the 
forage is allowed to wilt in the field after cutting, before it is ensi- 
laged, it will not be so heavy as it would put in green and succu- 
lent. 

In silos twenty feet deep our silage, put up as recommended, 
weighs from 35 to 40 pounds to the cubic foot, and a cubic foot 
makes a little more than a day's ration, with grain, for a cow or 
looo-pound steer. 



Silage as a Feed- Stuff. 45 



In the Northern States a cubic foot of silage is generally esti- 
mated at 50 pounds, and this also represents nearly the amount 
required to feed a cow in milk, or full grown steer, for one day. 

In building a silo, therefore, the capacity in cubic feet, after 
deducting two feet from the upper surface for settling, will fairly 
represent the number of days' feed the silo will hold. This sup- 
poses the silo to be filled until settling ceases at the time the crop 
is harvested. 

From the estimates given, one of the silos shown in the first 
plan will hold 5,832 days' feed for one cow or steer, or 116 days' 
feed for 50 steers. 



CHAPTER VII. 

Silage as a Feed-Stuff. 



^CONSIDERABLE attention has been given to the question of 
iH stock feeding, both in Europe and in this country, and many 
experiments have been made to determine the food values of many 
of our farm and mill products. 

The individual variation in any class of animals, even under 
similar conditions, renders it impossible to formulate exact rules 
for feeding, and when we have to consider feeding different kinds 
of animals, and feeding for different purposes, the question be- 
comes still more complicated. 

A sufficient number of experiments, however, have been made 
to give us some light on the subject, and to enable us to lay down 
a few general rules which, although not exact, perhaps, for any 
one animal, are near enough correct to guide us in the prepara- 
tion of food rations for our stock. Without going into a detailed 
account of the principles of feeding, we will simply state that the 
food ration should contain some definite amount of certain mate- 
rials, and these materials should be in certain proportions to give 
the best results in feeding. 



46 Silage as a Feed- Stuff. 

The digestibility and chemical composition of the materials 
used will largely determine in what proportions they should be 
combined. By digestibility is meant that part of the food which, 
when taken into the stomach of an animal, will be absorbed into 
the system, and not simply passed through and excreted as solid 
dung. 

The digestibility of different feed-stuffs varies as a whole, and 
in certain elements found in nearly every material used for food. 

In the analysis of any food the chemist finds a certain propor- 
tion of what he calls albuminoids, fats and sugar, starch, and 
crude fibre, and the first such part of the food as contains 
nitrogen. 

The experiments in cattle feeding indicate that the best re- 
sults are obtained when the digestible albuminoid part of the food 
bears some definite relation to the digestible carbo-hydrates, in- 
cluding the fats, and from this the quantity of each kind of food 
to be mixed together to form the dail}^ ration is estimated in mak- 
ing up food tables. 

As stated, owing to the variation in animals, and to the dif- 
ferent purposes for which they are fed, and to the fact that the 
amount the animal will digest is not always the same, the exact 
proportion of the two cannot be given, but a sufiiciently close 
estimate may be made to be of great assistance. 

It has been found that the ration should contain one part of 
digestible albuminoids to from four to six parts of digestible carbo- 
hydrates, including fats estimated as carbo-hydrates.* 

If we examine the composition of some of our common feed 
stuffs and estimate the digestibility as determined in actual feed- 
ing tests, we find, as a rule, the proportion is wider, or narrower, 
than the one given, and that to secure the proper proportions, we 
will have to prepare a compound containing two or more mate- 
rials. 

We present a table showing* the composition of the digestible 
part of several foods. 



*The digestible fats in a food are estimated to be worth two and a half times as much 
as the carbo-hydrates, and in the following table the amount of fats in the food given is 
multiplied by two and or.e-half and the sum added to the carbo-hydrates in making the 
calculation. 



Silage as a Feed- Stuff. 



47 



One Hundred Pounds of the following materials contain on an 
average of digestible elements : 



Feed Stuffs. 



Corn silage 

Common hay 

Clover haj 

Oat straw 

Corn 

Oats 

Wheat bran 

Cotton seed (estimated) 

Linseed meal 

Cotton se. d meal .... 



< 



2.17 
3-13 

7-53 
1-45 
S.37 
990 
11.56 

13-79 
2S.12 

35-75 



cj — • ^ 
^'^ I 

o ui2 
O 



21.83 

43 35 
43.60 

4331 
7643 
5S.16 

52-5 
66.9 

53 21 
.53-06 



to 10. o 
to 13.0 

to 5 7 
to 30.0 
to 9.0 



I to 
I to 
I to 
I to 
r to 



59 
4-5 
48 
1. 8 
1.4 



The German feeding experiments indicate that a fattening 
ox weighing 1000 pounds should have a daily ration of 2^ to 3 
pounds of digestible albuminoids and 12 to 16 pounds of digestible 
carbohydrates. 

The table shows that a steer would have to eat more than 100 
pounds of silage daily to get the requisite amount of albumoids, 
and in doing this he would eat more than is required of carbo-hy- 
drates. We notice the same diflficulty with common hay, and the 
oat straw is still farther out of the way. 

Clover hay contains about the right proportion of the two in. 
gredients, but the steer would have to eat 33 ^i pounds per day 
to get 2.52 albuminoids and 14.5 pounds of carbo-hydrates, a 
greater quantity than he can dispose of. 

Eating 20 pounds of corn per day of which the ratio is i to 
9, the animal would get the proper amount of the latter ingre- 
dient but not enough of the former. 

Twenty-five pounds of oats per day, with a ratio of i to 5.9 
would supply 2.42 pounds of albuminoids and 14.54 pounds of car- 
bohydrates, about the right proportion. The same amount of 
wheat bran would also make a properly compounded ration, 
and the same is true of cotton seed. 

Cotton seed meal has a very narrow ratio, i to 1.4; 25 pounds 
would be required to supply 12. i pound, of carbohydrates but 
this would give nearly 9 pounds of albuminoids, three times as 
much as is needed. I^inseed meal has also a narrow ratio. 



48 



Silage as a Feed- Stuff. 



From the table we see that corn is not the proper grain to 
feed with oat straw, silage or hay, as they all have too wide 
ratios; oats are better and cotton seed and wheat bran still better, 
but cotton seed meal and linseed meal give us the best propor- 
tioned foods to mix with silage and other foods having a wide 
nutritive ratio. 

To illustrate the manner of using the table we present several 
combinations of feed-stuffs prepared from analyses made by 
the experiment station chemists, and as the rations given have 
been tested in feeding, we are confident they will prove satis- 
factory. 



Conipoiuidiyig Food Ratio7is. 





Variety. 


Albuminoids. 
Pounds. 


Carbohydrates 

and fats. 

Pounds. 


Nutritive 
ratio. 


No. I— 

25 pounds corn silage 

15 " cotton seed 


•54 
2.07 


5 45 
10.00 




Toial 


261 

•72 
2.14 


15-45 

7.27 
3.18 


I to 5.9 


No. 2— 

33/3 pounds corn silage 

6 " cotton seed meal. 


Total 

No. 3- 

20 pounds silage 

5 " clover or cow pea 

vine hay 

5 pounds corn meal 

10 " wheat bran 


2.86 

•43 
•37 


10.45 

4^36 

2.18 
382 

5-5 


I to 3.6 


Total . 

No. 4— 
20 pounds hay 


2.36 

.62 

.67 

I -43 


15.61 

8.66 
6.11 

2.12 


I to 6.6 


8 " corn meal 

4 " cotton seed meal . . 




Total 


2 72 


1689 


I to 6.2 





The preceding rations are given to show how different feed- 
stuffs may be combined to make the proper ratio of albuminoids 
and carbo-hydrates. 



Cattle Feeding. 49 

In compounding such rations the cost of the diflferent accessi- 
ble feed-stuffs will determine to a great extent what should be 
used, and it must be remembered that the taste of the animal will 
also have to be consulted, as he maj^ refuse to eat a sufficient 
quantity of certain foods that would otherwise be economical to 
use. 

It is not claimed that a ration having a nutiitive ratio within 
the limits given will always give better results than a wider or 
narrower ratio, but it will be found on trial that as a general rule, 
something approaching the above formulas will give the best re- 
sults. 



CHAPTER VIII. 
Cattle Feeding, 



HP^HE limits of this book will permit of only a few suggestions 
m^ in regard to cattle feeding, and what we have to offer will 
refer more particularly to feeding in the Southern States. 

We repeat here what we have said under '' Suggesiio?is to 
Feeders," in Bulletin No. 6, of the Texas Agricultual Experi- 
mental Station: 

" Two things are essential in fattening animals : 

" I. To keep the animal comfortable and quiet. 

" 2. To induce him to eat the largest possible amount of nu- 
tritious food. 

" One is of little value without the other. To keep the cat- 
tle comfortable, shelter from rain is indispensable. Cattle fall off 
as rapidly during a cold rainy spell in Texas, with the tempera- 
ture at the freezing point, or a little under, as the}' do in Dakota, 
with the temperature belo^r zero. 

" Range cattle, as a rule, will not do their best under close 
confinement, i. e., tying up by the head. They may be shut up 
in a building, but need room to move around. 

" Wild cattle must be handled quietly. This point u/^ wish 
to emphasize, for it is entirely overlooked by too many cattle men. 
A barking dog and a noisy, loud-mouthed man are two things 
that should never be permitted to enter a cattle feeding pen. It 
should be remembered that when a naturally wild steer is struck 
with a whip or disturbed in any wa^-, he stops gaining weight 
for a time, and food consumed is a loss. 



5© Cattle Feeding. 



" This is not a sentiment, but a business matter of working 
the animal machine to its full capacity. Dehorning seems to 
affect a wild steer somewhat as 'throwing' the horse in the Rarey 
method of breaking colts. Then the head remaining sensitive 
for some time, wild steers are subdued and stand quietl)' together 
in a way that must be seen to be believed. 

"We are of the opinion that steers should be dehorned but a 
short time before shutting up to feed, so that they may be fattened 
while their heads are somewhat tender. 

" Feeding. 

' 'Cattle should be fed twice a day at a regular time, if confined 
in a building, by the same persons, and strangers excluded for at 
least a month after cattle are shut up. Feed what the cattle will 
eat and clean out mangers and troughs once ever}' day. Cattle 
dislike food that has been picked over and breathed on. 

"Vary the rations occasionally to stiniulate the appetite; have 
salt always before them, or better, if the feeder is careful and 
skillful, sprinkle a little salt on the food, but care must be exer- 
cised not to give too much." 

Steers that have been grown on farms where they are accus- 
tomed to seeing people, and cows that have been milked, take to 
close confinement better than the range cattle and thrive better 
when tied up in a barn, but having had considerable experience 
in feeding both classes of cattle, in both northern and southern 
states, we have but one plan to recommend, and that is to remove 
the horns by sawing them off close to the head and feed the 
cattle running loose, under shelter, without tying. 

If handled quietly and supplied with the right kind of food, 
and with not more than one hundred head together in one pen, 
and the cattle of nearly the same size, we believe this method of 
feeding, taking into consideration the labor of getting the food 
to the cattle, disposing of the manure, and gain in weight, will 
give the best results. 

Dehorning is a simple and safe operation, much more so than 
castration. With a properly constructed chute for holding the 
animal or by throwing him on the ground the horns may be cut 
off with a light butcher's saw, an ordinary carpenter's back saw, 
or with one of the saws made specially for the purpose. 

Experiments in Wisconsin, Tennes.see and Texas, and the 
thousands of animals operated on in the northern states, show 



Cattle Feeding. 51 



that the removal of the horns does not seriously effect the animal 
if the work is properly performed, nor does it cause shrinkage in 
weight. 

The Best Food to Use. 

Where corn can be grown or procured for 20 cents per bushel 
or less and good hay is worth not more than three dollars per ton, 
if the climate is mild and not too wet, it is doubtful if feeding on 
corn and hay in racks in open d^y lots sheltered from the wind, 
with hogs running with the steers can be improved upon.* Such 
a system of feeding is wasteful, but economical feeding means 
getting the largest return with the least outlay, and any sj^stem 
in which the extra cost of labor exceeds the value of food saved 
by the system, is neither economical nor scientific. 

Our suggestions are made for the benefit of those who are 
situated where corn and ha}^ are worth more than the values 
given above. 

Corn is king as a stock grain food for the countr}' at large 
aud it is perhaps the cheapest food to use in several of the central 
and west central states. 

In the greater portion of the cotton belt, cotton seed and 
cotton seed meal supplies a cheaper fattening food than corn, and 
particularl}' so when fed with corn, and sorghum silage, or other 
food lacking in nitrogenous matter. 

Competition in beef production has lowered the value of beef 
cattle to the extent that only by the most economical system of 
feeding and the use of food stuffs that supply nutriment in the 
cheapest form is there hope of making the business profitable. 

In fact the indications are that profitable cattle feeding will 
in time be largel}^ confined to sections of the country, or particu- 
lar localities where cheap food can be supplied and the cattle will 
be moved from the breeding and grazing ground to those places. 

A large area of the southern states is adapted to the produc- 
tion of cheap cattle food. Corn and sorghum for silage may be 
grown at less cost and with more certaint}' than in the northern 
states, and for hay, the cow pea, Johnson grass, Bermuda, Japan 
clover, red clover and other plants are not surpas,sed in yield and 
quality by the hay plants elsewhere. 



*Ihe corn and hay ration may be improved by adding: a little boiled cotton seed. The 
cattle will fatten taster, and the cost per pound gain be less it seed are not worth above ten 
cents per bushel . 



52 Cattle Feeding. 



For the grain or richer part of the ration corn is produced in 
portions of these states, and particular!}- in Texas, as cheap as in 
Kansas or Illinois, but cotton seed and cotton seed meal will 
probably continue to be the cheapest concentrated cattle food to 
supplement or replace corn for very many cattle feeders. 

Cotton seed hulls also supply a valuable coarse food for cattle 
feeding, being equal in value to good \iz.\ pound for pound. 

A feed ration of hulls and cotton seed meal alone gives as 
good results in fattening as corn and ha}-. 

In our feeding experiments last winter^" six native Texas 
steers, three and four j-ears old, averaging 741 pounds live weight 
at the beginning, made an average gain of 202 pounds each in 83 
days, or a gain of 2.43 pounds per day. 6.74 pounds of cotton seed 
hulls and 2.79 pounds of cotton seed meal were consumed for each 
pound gain in weight. 

Estimating the cotton crop at 7,000,000 bales annually, the 
cotton seed crop amounts to some 3,500,000 tons, which would 
yield some 1,750,000 tons of cotton seed hulls and 1,312,000 tons 
of cotton seed meal, if the oil were extracted from the entire crop 
of cotton seed, or three-fourths of the quantity after deducting- 
one-fourth of the crop for planting and waste. 

The average market price of cotton seed on the plantation is 
not more than S6 per ton, and the average price of the meal and 
hulls at the cotton seed oil mills is about $18 and $2 respectively. 
The use of cotton seed for cattle feeding, with corn and other for- 
age crops that the southern climate is specially adapted to pro- 
duce, supplies food for fattening cattle and feeding dairy cows at 
the minimum cost. 

Preparation of the Food. 

So far as digestibilty is concerned, chopping, grinding and 
cooking food adds nothing in cattle feeding, except in the case of 
hard grain and seeds that the animal will not masticate well. 
Such seeds may pass through the stomach and be excreted with- 
out giving up their nutriment. 

The manipulation of the food in the ways referred to, partic- 
ularl}' in chopping coarse fodder and mixing ground grain with 
it, may make the food more palatable, and by this method the 
animal may be induced to eat more food and to eat certain things 
he would reject if fed whole and alone. 

*tiulletin No. 6, Texas Agricultural Experiment Slatioii, pp. 22 '^'6. 



Cattle Feeding, 53 



For example: In feeding whole, matured dry corn fodder, 25 
to 50 per cent of the stalks will be rejected ; with corn in the 
shuck, the cob and shuck will be left, whereas, if the* first is 
chopped fine and meal sprinkled over it, it will nearly all be con- 
sumed, and if the corn, cob and and shuck be ground up together 
the animal takes it without question. 

Cattle will pull out and waste a good deal of hay or other 
forage when fed whole, which they will not do with chopped feed, 
so that chopping, grinding and cooking may be of value in saving 
food . 

The manipulation of the food adds to its cost, and if one is 
not careful the labor expended will amount to more than the 
value of the food saved. 

The more costly the food, the more we can afibrd to expend 
in labor to have it consumed without waste, and to add to it 
cheap materials that will not be eaten when fed alone. So far as 
cooking food is concerned, it may be profitable in hog feeding, 
but the stomach of the ox is so well designed for preparing the 
food for assimilation that not much if anything is gained, except 
to make the food more palatable in some instances. 

We have always found it more profitable to cook cotton seed 
for cattle, and simply because the cattle would eat more seed 
when cooked ; but with cooked corn, or other grain, the cattle 
relish the food no better, nor do they make any more rapid gain, 
as has been shown by repeated experiments. Cotton seed may 
be either steamed or boiled, but we would not recommend steam- 
ing unless a steam boiler is required for other purposes. 

For steaming the seed, a vat or box, ot metal or of wood, 
with a lid that can be fastened down quite tight, is necessary, and 
a good head of steam must be kept on for three or four hours to 
soften the seed. Water must be put in with the seed, as they 
will not cook unless fully saturated. We have cooked cotton seed 
in both ways, but boiling has given so much greater satisfaction 
that we continue to use the boiler in preference to steaming, al- 
though we have a steam engine and boiler at our command. 

For a few cattle, one of the cauldron or stove boilers, holding 
from 50 to 75 gallons and costing from $15 to $20, is convenient, 
but for a large herd a boiler may be made that is less expensive 
and more economical in the use of fuel. 



54 



Cattle Feeding. 



Bill of IvUmber. — Feeding Shed 27x108 Feet. 



FEET. 

posts 480 

posts to support siding 84 

plates 112 

plates 384 

purlins 240 

braces, center posts to purlins . . 192 

braces, all around 760 

manger posts 168 

manger supports 96 

manger front and bottom .... i , 296 

manger back and batten .... 432 

siding 480 

to board gable ends 480 

roof batten {b , Fig. ij.^ .... 156 

roof plank 4,050 

roof plank battens 2,025 



20 pieces 4"x 


4x18', 


9 ' 


' 2"x 


4 X14. 


12 


2"x 


4 X14, 


48 ' 


2"x 


4"xi2', 


20 ' 


2"x 


6"xi2' 


12 


'■ 3"x 


4"xi6' 


95 ' 


' 2"x 


4"xi2' 


14 ' 


3"x 


4 X12 , 


12 


2"x 


4"xi2', 


54 ■ 


2"xi2"xi2' 


36 ' 


l"xi2"xi2' 


80 ' 


i"x 


6"xi2' 


30 ' 


' i"xi2"xi6' 


13 ' 


' 2"X 


4"xi8' 


225 


' i"xi2"xi8', 


225 ' 


' i"x 


6"xiS' 



Total 11,435 

Floor. 

FEET. 

400 pieces 2"x6"xi2', flooring 4,800 

24 " 2"x4"xi8', to support floor plank 288 

9 " 2"x6"xi2ij', center supports of floor .... 108 



Total 5.196 



Specifications of Feeding Shed. 

Twentj'-seven by 108 feet, for feeding from 80 to no head of 
dehorned steers. 

Figure 13 shows cross section of building, posts, ends of 
purlin plates (p p), battens (bd), 2"x4" stuff to stiffen roof plank 
and keep them from warping, ends of mangers (m ;«), braces to 
support purlins (a a), ends of siding. 



Cattle Feeding. 



55 







56 



Cattle Feedino-. 







Figure 14 — View from side, showing posts, and braces from 
posts to plates, purlin plates {p p), back of manger (m); also sec- 
tion of roof plank. 



Cat He Feeding. 



57 




^^\^ f6Z 




58 



Cattle Feeding. 







We present a plan of a boiler (Fig. i8) we have used for sev- 
eral years with good results. It is simply a wooden box two feet 
wide, two feet deep, and fifteen feet long, with galvanized 
sheet-iron bottom nailed on, set on a brick wall. When 
fuel is somewhat expensive it is well to put in grate bars 
under the fire, and make the fire-box not more than three feet 
long, and sixteen to twenty inches from grate to bottom of the 
boiler. When wood is no object make the fire-box five feet long, 
and allow two to two and a half feet from bottom of fire-box to 
boiler, and use wood four feet long. The wall around the fire-box 
should be eight inches thick, but a twelve inch wall will last 



Cattle Feeding Shed. 59 



longer, and it should have a foundation carried down six inches 
below the bottom of the fire-box. 

The back wall of the fire-box (Fig. 19) should be four inches 
lower than the side walls, and the space back of this filled level 
with dirt to carry the heat close to the bottom of the boiler. 

The short inside cross wall near the rear of the boiler founda- 
tion (Fig. 19) is put in to support the pipe, or stack, and to check 
the heat from passing out too rapidly. 

Back of the fire-box a four-inch wall is all that is required. 

Figure 18 shows boiler and brick-work complete, and Figure 
19 the brick- work. The irregular line along the side of the wal 
represents the surface of the ground. 

Bill of Material fo-r Cotton Seed Boiler. 

2 plank 2"x24"xi6 feet. 
2 plank 2"x24"x2 feet. 
4 iron bolts i/2"x29". 

1 piece galvanized sheet-iron (No. 17 guage), 28"xi5'x4". 
4 pounds \yi" wire nails. 

750 brick. 

2 bushels of lime. 



CHAPTER IX. 
Cattle Feeding Shed. 



Ili^iHILE stockmen generally know that cattle will not gain 



Sft weight if exposed during the cold, wet weather, the 
opinion is common that shelter is impracticable. In fact it has 
been found that range steers will not always thrive when tied up 
and closely confined. Their legs stiffen and swell up ; they will 
not always eat, and as turning out and tying up again each day is 
entirely out of the question there is reason for the common 
opinion. We assume that economical feeding must include shel- 
ter, and that the solution of the problem, how to make sheltering 
practicable, is essential to an improved and profitable method of 
feeding."^' 

*Texas txpt. Station Bulletin, page S. 



6o Cattle Feeding Shed. 



It has been held that shelter for cattle is unnecessary in the 
warm climate of the Southern States, but it is probable that cattle 
shrink more when exposed to the cold and protracted rain storms 
in the South than they do when exposed to the severe but dry 
cold weathfer in the Northern States. 

Our own experience leads us to believe that shelter is one of 
the essentials in economical cattle feeding even in the Gulf 
States. 1 

We submit plan of a cattle-feeding shed suitable for the 
Southern States, or for a colder climate if boxed in, designed to 
hold the largest number of cattle, with a minimum of space, and 
material required in the building. 

In feeding in such a building the cattle must be dehorned or 
the weaker ones will not do well, and not so many cattle will 
stand quietly together and feed. 

The shed is designed for the Southern States, and is there- 
fore not boarded up on the sides, but even here it is well to board 
up the north side and end to protect from cold winds and driving 
rains. 

Feeding Shed. 

The plan (Fig. 13) shows cross section of the building, and 
Figure 14 shows two bents from the side. The shed is twenty- 
seven feet wide, and the roof is supported on three rows of 4x4 
posts, set in the ground, and twelve feet apart from center to 
center. 

Poles from the woods may be used for posts, but we have in- 
cluded the posts in the bill of lumber. 

Figure 15 shows ends of roof planks, with grooves in upper 
surface of wide plank (a), and on lower side of battens {b b) to 
prevent water from working under; planks (a a) i"xi2"xi8', planks 
{b b) i"x6"xi8'. 

Construction. 

Center posts 4"x4"xi8\ set 3 feet in the ground ; 15 feet from 
ground to ridge pole ; posts on sides 4"x4"x9\ set 2 feet 4 inches 
in the ground. 

Plate and ridge pole pieces butt together on posts, as shown 
in plan, and are spiked with 20-penny nails ; all extend 2 feet 



Cattle Feeding Shed. 6i 



beyond posts at ends of shed ; all braces cut with beveled ends to 
fit, and nailed with 12-penny nails. 

Purlin plate ( p) is let in i inch on 3^x4^^ supporting braces 
(«, /v^. /j), and piece of i^^x6", 2 feet long, nailed on upper side 
of purlin joints to hold plates from drawing apart. 

A, Figure 15 — i"xi2^' roof boards to have groove ^ of an 
inch deep and i inch from edge on each side on upper surface, and 
some with battens {b, Fig. 15) on under surface, as shown in 
Figure 15. 

Roof boards to be nailed to plates, purlins, 2^x4" batten {b b 
Fig. 13) and ridge plate, three 8 penny nails in each, and battens 
with lo-penny nails, two nails in each. Any split or badly 
checked roof plank should be rejected. 

Mangers. 

Front and bottom of 2^x12" plank, back of i"xi2^' plank, a 
2^x4" piece to be placed at the center of each bent, extending 
from ground to plate (Fig. 14 shows this piece cut off at bottom 
of manger), and let in and nailed to back side of manger battens, 
to which manger back and siding are nailed. 

The 3^x4" posts supporting the manger to be set i foot in the 
ground. Short posts at back side of manger, between posts of 
shed ; cross-pieces of 2^x4" under manger, spiked to posts, to 
which bottom of manger is nailed, upper edge of front of manger 
2 feet 3 inches above floor. 

Floor. 

If the shed stands on sandy land no floor will be required, 
and it may be dispensed with on any dry soil if a little dry bed- 
ding is used. When the ground is flat and wet it may be best to 
put in the floor. 

The floor is made of 2^^x6^x12^ stuff, laid crosswise of the 
shed, ends meeting at the center under the ridge pole. The oppo- 
site ends will just reach under the mangers. 

Before laying the floor the ground is to be made smooth, with 
a moderate slope from center to side of shed, and two runs of 
2^^x4^^xi8^ stuff" laid flush with the ground, lengthwise of the shed 
each side of the center posts, one run just inside of the manger, 
the other half way from manger to center posts. One run of 



62 Cattle Feeding Shed. 



2"x6^^xi2^ stuif to be laid in the same way on the line of, and be- 
tween the center posts. The flooring is laid on the pieces bedded 
in the ground, ends meeting on the 2'^x6" pieces at the center and 
spiked to all the pieces. 

A ^-inch space to be left between the floor plank to catch 
and hold litter and prevent the cattle from slipping. Flooring 
plank should rest on the ground ; the strips underneath are used 
simply to hold plank in place, 



Gates may be hung at the ends of the shed, to shut the cattle 
in or out. The gates should be wide enough to allow the passage 
of team and wagon to haul in feed and haul out manure. The 
feed may be put in from the outside by leaving off one of the 
siding plank above the manger. 

The manger is designed for silage and chopped feed, but it 
may also be used for hay. If hay is to be fed with silage it will 
be well to construct a rack over the manger, from which the hay 
may be pulled by the cattle. 

With a small herd of cattle — less than fifty head — and espec- 
ially in a dairy herd, it is desirable to have the silo and place for 
storing feed attached to the shed that shelters the cattle, to save 
labor in feeding, but in feeding a large number of steers not much 
is gained from having the storage and shelter buildings all com- 
bined, and the certainty of total loss if one catches on fire makes 
it a hazardous risk. 

The buildings should not be far apart, and they should be so 
arranged that the feed may be easily loaded on to a wagon, or 
cart, and the load hauled close to the mangers and the feed 
shoveled or pitched in. 

The cattle will fatten faster if confined to small lots near the 
feeding shed, and they should be shut inside the shed during bad 
spells of weather. Nothing will be gained by allowing the cattle 
to run over the pastures during winter, while feeding. The little 
grass they get will take away their relish for dry feed, and really 
do more harm than good. The fattening season should be made 
as short as possible, and to secure this the cattle should be in- 
duced to eat as much as they will. Changing from one lot to 
another, turning in a new lot of steers — anything that excites or 



Cattle Feediyig Shed. 



63 



disturbs the cattle, tends to check consumption of food, and with 
it gain in weight. 

Much more might be written with reference to the selection 
and preparation of feed stuffs for cattle, and we would like to 
dwell on the importance of skill and care in the management of 
the work in feeding. Constant study of the requirements of the 
animal is necessary to secure the best results. 







^^ 



Index to Contents. 65 



INDEX. 



PAGE. 

Albuminoids 46 

/analysis of Silage 22, 24 

Analysis of Silage Northern and Southern Varieties of Corn. 23, 24 

Bedding Land for Corn 17 

Bedding Land — Single and Double Beds 17 

Carbo Hydrates 46 

Cattle Dehorning 50 

Cattle Feeding — Close Confinement 62 

Cattle Feeding, Study of 45 

Cattle Feeding, on Cotton Seed Hulls and Meal 52 

Cattle Feeding — Suggestions to Stock Feeders 49 

Cattle, How to Feed 50 

Cattle, Quiet Handling 49 

Clod Crusher 18 

Cooking Food for Cattle 52 

Corn, Amount of Food from an Acre 20 

Corn, Amount of Sugar in 22 

Corn, Best Variety for Silage and for Dry Forage .... 21 

Corn, B. & W 21 

Corn, Certainty of Crop 19, 20 

Corn, Composition oi Different Varieties 22, 27 

Corn, Cutting When in Tassel 26 

Corn, Distance Between Stalks 16 

Corn, Double and Single Beds 17 

Corn, Dry Matter in 22, 24, 27 

Corn, Early Planting 18 

Corn, Effect on of Rich and Poor Soil 15 

Corn, Flat Culture and Bedding Land 16 

Corn, for Dry Forage 21 

Corn, Growing for Both Grain and Forage 15 

Corn, Habits of Growth in Different Latitudes 15,22 

Corn, How to Grow 15 

Corn, How to Plant 18 



66 Index to Contents. 



Corn, Injury from Deep Cultivation 19 

Corn, in Kansas 15 

Corn, Large vs. Small Varieties 23 

Corn, Not a Complete Food 48 

Corn, Quality Affected by Method of Growing 16 

Corn, Replanting 18 

Corn, Root Development 19 

Corn, Sweet Varieties for Silage 21 

Corn, Thick Planting 16 

Corn, Varieties, Northern vs. Southern 21, 22 

Corn vs Cotton Seed as a Feed Stuff 51 

Corn vs Sorghum Silage 15 

Cotton Seed, Boiler 57, 58 

Cotton Seed, How to Cook 53-58 

Cotton Seed Hulls 52 

Cotton Seed Meal 12 

Cotton Seed Meal, Composition of 47 

Cotton Seed Meal for Feeding 52 

Cotton Seed, Raw vs. Cooked 53 

Cotton Seed vs. Corn as a Feed Stuff 51 

Compounding Feed Rations 48 

Cow Peas, When to Harvest for Silage 28 

Crops Best to Grow for Silage 14 

Crops for Silage Put up Whole 9 

Covering for Silage in the Silo 8 

Cultivation, Deep and Shallow 19 

Cultivation of Crops for Silage 15 

Dry Forage, Difficulty in Curing 11,12 

Dry Forage, Loss in Feeding 1 1 

Dry Forage vs. Silage 9, 10 

Doura 25 

Dehorning Cattle 50 

Definition of the words "Silo," "Silage" and "Ensilage." 6 

Decompo-sition of Silage 6 

Early vs. Late Harvesting Forage 26 

Ensilage Crops, Yield per Acre 15 

Ensilage, French System 7 

Experiments, Corn Growing in Wisconsin 22 

Experiments, Corn Growing in New York 26 

Experiments, Corn Growing in Pennsylvania 27 

Experiments, German Feeding Cattle 47 



Index to Conte7its. 67 



Experiments, in Dehorning Cattle 50 

Feed Cutters, Best Kind 32 

Feed Cutters, Carrier for 33 

Feed Cutters, Capacity of 34 

Feed Cutters, Care in Running 33 

Feed Cutters, Setting Up 32 

Feeding Barn, Material for 54 

Feeding Barn, Plans and Specifications 55. 59 

Feed StuflFs, Amount Cotfsumed per Day 47 

Feed Stuffs, Composition of 46, 47 

Feed Stuffs, Cooking 13. 53 

Feed Stuffs, Digestibility of 13, 14, 46 

Feed Stuffs, Palateableness of 13 

Feed Stuffs, Succulent Condition of 13 

Feed Stuffs, the Best to Use 51 

Floor for Cattle Feeding Shed 61 

Floor for Silo 40 

Food, Chopping, Grinding and Cooking 53 

Food, Cooking for Stock 13 

Food, Preparation of 52 

Forage Crops, Yield of 9, 22, 24 

German Feeding Experiments 47 

Goffart's Method of Filling the Silo 7 

Harvesting Silage Crop 26 

Harvesting Silage Crop, cost of 32 

Harvesting Silage Crop, Labor Required 32 

Harvesting Silage Crop, Method of Cutting in Field ... 29 
Harvesting Silage Crop, Necessity for Good Management. 32 
Harvesting Silage Crop, Time Required to Fill Silo . . . 11, 32 

Hay, Quantity Consumed when Fed with Silage ..... 12 

History of System of Silage 5 

Implements, Corn Knife 29 

Implements, Home Made Clod Crusher 17 

Implements, Rack for Handling Forage 30 

I-uplements, Smoothing Harrow 19 

Implements, Wagon for Hauling Forage 29 

Kafi&r Corn 25 

L/cngth of Cut of Forage 34 

Listing Corn Land 16 

Miles, Dr. M., on Filling Silo 7 

Nutritive Ratio 46 



68 Index to Contents. 

Palatability of Food 13 

Palatability, Effect on Digestion 13 

Palatability, Increasing Consumption 12 

Palatability of Dry Forage 28 

Palatability of Silage •. ... 12, 28 

Rack for Hauling Silage 30 

Range Cattle Feeding 49 50 

Rations, Compounding 48 

Replanting Corn 18 

Roof for Cattle Sheds 57, 61 

Root Crops Compared with Silage 13 

Silage as an Appetizer 12 

Silage, Cattle L,iking for 12 

Silage, Cause of Acidity 7 

Silage, Cause of Decav 6, 8 

Silage, Composition of 24 

Silage, Covering for in Silo 8 

Silage Crop, Hauling to Cutter 31 

Silage Crop, Implements for Harvesting 29 

Silage Crop, Rack for Hauling 30 

Silage Crop, Wagon for Hauling 29 

Silage, Digestibility of 14 

Silage Feeding, Effect on Cattle 13, 14 

Silage Feeding, Out from Silo 44 

Silage from Partially cured Forage 7 

Silage from Wet Forage 7 

Silage from Uncut Forage 9 

Silage, Length of Cut 34 

Silage, Opinions of Practical Men 10 

Silage, Overestimation of 9 

Silage, Quantity Cattle Eat per Day 23 

Silage, Sweet and Sour 7, 28 

Silage vs. Dry Forage 9, 10 

Silage, Weight of 44 

Silage, What Crops to Grow for 14 

Silo, Capacity of 44 

Silo, Cheap Structure 41 

Silo, Filling Slow and Fast 7 

Silo, How to Build 34 

Silo, Material Required 38, 42 

Silo, Method of Filling 33 



Index to Co7itents. 69 



Silo, Plan of 36, 41 

Silo, Plastered Walls 8 

Silo, Pressure Against Walls 35 

Silo, Tie Rods Across to Support Walls 44 

Silo, When First Used 5 

Silo, When First Used in Gulf States 5 

Silo, Wood vs. Brick or Stone Walls 34 

Sorghum, Certainty of Crop 19, 20 

Sorghum, for Dry Sections and Poor Land 14 

Sorghum, Non-Saccharine Varieties 8, 25 

Sorghum, Sweet Varieties 8, 28 

Sorghum, Varieties to Plant 25 

Sorghum vs. Corn Silage 15 

Sorghum, When to Harvest for Silage 28 

Succulent Food 13 

Sugar in Corn 22 

Sugar in Sorghum 28 

Table — Albuminoids, Carbo- Hydrates and Nutritive ratio 

of different Feed Stuffs 47 

Table — Analysis of Corn Silage from several States ... 24 
Table — Showing increase of Dry Matter in Corn from tas- 

selling stage to maturity 27 

Table — Weight of Corn Fodder, Dry Matter, Sugar and 

Protein per acre in different Varieties of Corn in 

Wisconsin 22 

Teosinte 25 

Wild Cattle Feeding 49- 50 

Yield of Crop Grown for Silage 15, 22, 24, 27 



FOR SIL-OS 



• •#• • 



ixjse: 



JUia^TAAjYvcl vorouul ^mmJmY\/J^ 



FOR L-INING. 



FOR COHERING. 




INODOROUS. X FIRE-PROOF. 

WATER-PROOF. ^ Put on by Anybody 



DAMP-PROOF, j Is non-conductor of Heat. 



Send direct to Manufacturers for Samples, Prices 
and Catalogues. 

nl^ret - Warrei^ Mai^ufactarii^g Go, 

No. 113 N. 8th Street, ST. LOUIS, MO. 

No. 1 6 W. Mo. Av., KANSAS CITY, MO. 



D. G, Z{ H, G. f\eeh 3( Go 



Mapufacburers of bbe 



Wood ar)cl Steel Fran^^s. 







11^ 



CDx^<z- a-nd. T^xt-o 3iorse; 

Culbivators I Broad=Vast Senders. 



r ©iiLf f i£ ill 



'■ ♦ " 



Our No, lo Riding Cultivator leads them all; as a Corn 

Cultivator it is a perfect success; works 

equally as well in Cotton. 

Send for Circulars. 



jy. 






' » 



THE BOWSHER COMBINED FEED GRINDING MILL. 




The illustration displays Bowsher's combined ieed grinding 
mill. This is a substantially built, practical machine, novel in 
many respects and radically different from all other feed mills 
now in the market. It is supplied with the elevator attachment 
or without, as ordered, and is built in two sizes which require 
from 6 to 12 horse power, the capacity being sufficient to meet 
the demands of large stock raisers and those who carry on a cus- 
tom milling business. They crush corn with the shuck or with- 
out, and grind every kind of small g»ain, oil cake, etc., also crush 
corn and grind small grain at the same time, mixing the two in 
any proportion desired; have self- feed for ear corn and all the 
other conveniences which go to make a first-class, modern feed 
mill. The particular distinguishing feature of fhe Bowsher mill, 
however, is its conical shaped grinders This cone shape makes 
it possible tor the grinders to present a correct 
shearing edge to the grain at all times; a 
large amount of grinding surface is secured 
and the work is done close to the centre of the 
shaft, thus making an extraordinarily light 
running machine. Numerous practical, labor 
saving ■ devices are also adjuncts of this 
mill. Pamphlet containing full information 
will be promptly furnished on application to 

H. W. HUBBARD, 

GENERAL SOUTHWESTERN MANAGER, 
Atlanta, Ca., or Dallas, Texas, 




1^1- 



UBRARY OF CONGRESS 



DDD57bbl7ab 



immm. 



